The $15 Boycott: Will you be participating?

[llreader]

Originally Posted by Sydney's Mom

Well, that sure didn't work for Amazon. They were too successful with their sales model - Apple had to squash them.

Wait, now Apple is the shadowy eminence pulling the strings here? I find that very far-fetched. The publishers can be stupid all by themselves, lets not let them off the hook with conspiracy theories just because there are other players in the market.

[Pardoz]

Originally Posted by llreader

Wait, now Apple is the shadowy eminence pulling the strings here?

There's nothing particularly shadowy about it, it's all quite out in the open. Check back through the news announcements right here on MR if you like.

The timeline is:

- Apple approaches Big Six publishing houses to provide Apple with e-books. Apple offers an agency agreement, offering publishers price control and a 70/30 revenue split, suggests setting opening hardcover bestseller prices in the $13-15 range. This is widely covered, as it lends credibility to the rumours about the much-speculated-on-but-as-yet-unannounced Apple tablet.

- In an interview just after the formal announcement of the tablet and the iBookstore, when asked how Apple's bookstore will be able to compete with Amazon's $9.99 bestsellers, Steve Jobs replies that prices "will be the same" at both stores.

- A few days later, Macmillan representatives demand that Amazon offer Macmillan the same deal Apple has already offered or Macmillan will delay releasing new e-books to Amazon until seven months after they have released them to Apple.

[llreader]

Yes, I am aware that Apple is the "other woman" in this affair, but you think that Steve Jobs dreamed all this up? That the $15 book was Apple's idea? That strikes me as... unlikely. Apple is another outlet. They gave the publishers what they wanted in order to get into the game - the price sucks, but they will be on an even footing with Amazon, so it doesn't really matter to them, since they don't see a lot of money in the ebook market.

Just because Starbucks sells coffee at 7-11 doesn't mean that 7-11 had some master plan to develop bottled Starbucks.

I mean, it certainly isn't impossible, but the way the news has trickled out is not Apple's style at all. Having one publisher anounce a deal, then another after a week, then silence and some confusion, and Jobs not talking about how "insanely great" this will all be. It isn't they way they normally do things.

[Pardoz]

Originally Posted by llreader

Yes, I am aware that Apple is the "other woman" in this affair, but you think that Steve Jobs dreamed all this up? That the $15 book was Apple's idea? That strikes me as... unlikely.

Given that every report I've seen of the negotiations says that it was Apple's idea, and that they basically walked into the meeting with a complete package ready to present, I don't really have any reason to believe it wasn't Apple's idea.

Look at it this way - you think e-books are irrelevant because "nobody reads anymore", but you still want some extra flash (although not Flash, unless it's a faked demo) to throw around at your big release announcement and an extra box to check off on your features list. You know absolutely nothing about publishing, and don't have access to any data about book-buying consumers, but you know the Big Six are unhappy with Amazon's $9.99 strategy. Why not suggest an agency deal at a 50% higher retail price? It's a no-lose proposition - you get the extra PR and another check-box on your spec sheet, and as an agent you don't have any costs to speak of, so even if nobody ever buys a single book you aren't out anything.

[llreader]

Could you link to the reports you have been reading? I am willing to consider the idea, but all the discussion I have seen, here and elsewhere, has dealth with Amazon and Macmillan, and who is at fault and what their goals are for the pricing schemes they propose. I have never seen the blame laid at Apple's feet, not even in the iPad threads in this forum.

I don't find the your rationale overly convincing, for the following reasons:

• "nobody reads" doesn't really mean anything - Jobs always talks down markets Apple is about to enter (Music, phone, etc.)
• "Apple doesn't understand publishing" doesn't mean they don't have billions of dollars to hire people who do know the business. They didn't know cell phones or music players either. They may make mistakes, but they don't bring half-baked ideas to the market.
• Why get into such a dangerous game, where they risk destroying Amazon's market and alienating lots of people without having much control over what the publishers will do next, and for a minor role in a market without a lot of money in it. Far too risky, far too likely to make them look bad, far too little to gain.
• I remain unconvinced.

[Blue Tyson]

Originally Posted by delphidb96

Yeah right. Not.

I just popped over to eReader.com and Fictionwise to see what this week's offerings would yield. Guess what? Lots of the new fiction releases are priced between $11.99 and $16.99! Didn't take the 'big 3' long to fix prices.

Now when it's a new Stephen King, while I don't *like* a higher price, he's such a big draw that it makes sense that a publisher would jack the price up for a while.

However, Virginia DeBerry has a new novel released this week. Never heard of her? Not a problem. eReader has all three of her novels available. The new one runs $14.99 - the older two have been jacked up to $14.00!

I'm feeling the urge to darknet, I swear I am!

Derek

P.S. What *really* makes no sense is the number of new Young Adult titles that have been put through the Price-Jack-O-Matic machine!

Yes. This is what a large percentage of us expect. Higher prices on almost all books - no lowering of old stuff.

A book I bought 6 weeks ago at $12 is now $16.40.

[Pardoz]

Originally Posted by llreader

Could you link to the reports you have been reading?

Wall Street Journal do? "Apple's business model for books, which the company has kept under tight wraps, shifts the focus away from the bargain-basement prices Amazon has made popular, according to publishers that have met directly with the company. Apple is asking publishers to set two e-book price points for hardcover best sellers: $12.99 and $14.99, with fewer titles offered at $9.99. In setting their own e-book prices, publishers would avoid the threat of heavy discounting. Apple would take a 30% cut of the book price, with publishers receiving the remaining 70%." (Bolded for emphasis).

I have never seen the blame laid at Apple's feet, not even in the iPad threads in this forum.

I recall it being mentioned, but it quickly got drowned out in the cries of "Green! Purple! Green! Purple!".

I don't find the your rationale overly convincing, for the following reasons:

*shrug* Suit yourself. If you've an alternate theory for why Apple decided to push for higher book prices, I'm perfectly happy to listen.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Pardoz

Wall Street Journal do? "Apple's business model for books, which the company has kept under tight wraps, shifts the focus away from the bargain-basement prices Amazon has made popular, according to publishers that have met directly with the company. Apple is asking publishers to set two e-book price points for hardcover best sellers: $12.99 and $14.99, with fewer titles offered at $9.99. In setting their own e-book prices, publishers would avoid the threat of heavy discounting. Apple would take a 30% cut of the book price, with publishers receiving the remaining 70%." (Bolded for emphasis).



I recall it being mentioned, but it quickly got drowned out in the cries of "Green! Purple! Green! Purple!".



*shrug* Suit yourself. If you've an alternate theory for why Apple decided to push for higher book prices, I'm perfectly happy to listen.

I think it was collusion between Apple and MacMillan that push this whole thing to the forefront. MacMillan clearly hates ebooks and is doing everything they can to kill them and preserve their print business. They hate the idea of library ebooks and the idea of discounted ebooks and particularly discounted ebook available at the hardback release date. They partnered with Apple to sell at the higher price and attempted to use that as leverage against Amazon. Amazon punched back. Only history will tell at this point who the survivors are.

[bookwurm70]

I don't think I've ever paid more than $15 for an ebook. Maybe I've paid $16, but that is about my limit. I know some books have been priced at $7.99 for print and $14.00 for ebooks. I won't buy those either. What I do instead is order them from PaperbackSwap.com and get them for free. You'd think the publisher would rather sell me the book for $8.00 than have me get it for free but that seems to be the choice they are making. I love PBS! It is like a legal "darknet".

[llreader]

Originally Posted by Pardoz

Wall Street Journal do? "Apple's business model for books, which the company has kept under tight wraps, shifts the focus away from the bargain-basement prices Amazon has made popular, according to publishers that have met directly with the company. Apple is asking publishers to set two e-book price points for hardcover best sellers: $12.99 and $14.99, with fewer titles offered at $9.99. In setting their own e-book prices, publishers would avoid the threat of heavy discounting. Apple would take a 30% cut of the book price, with publishers receiving the remaining 70%." (Bolded for emphasis).

I recall it being mentioned, but it quickly got drowned out in the cries of "Green! Purple! Green! Purple!".

*shrug* Suit yourself. If you've an alternate theory for why Apple decided to push for higher book prices, I'm perfectly happy to listen.

It is an interesting theory, one I will keep track of. No one else seems to believe that Apple, who isn't even in the market yet, is imposing prices on the publishers. It will be interesting to see how many of them go with Macmillan and if anyone who doesn't go with Apple adopts the same pricing structure. I can't see how selling less books is in Apple's interest. Breaking Amazon's "monopoly" (edit: they don't have a monopoly), certainly.

I just don't buy any explanation that goes "Apple is doing this stupid thing because they don't understand what they are doing". Apple introduces one or two new products a year (if that), and they tend to prepare them carefully, along with the software and marketing ecosystem that goes with them. If they proposed this, they have an angle, and I don't understand why they would want to jack up prices on what is already a marginal product. That certainly isn't going to grow the market. Maybe they want to kill the market, but I don't see how that helps them at all.

It isn't clear that Apple was pushing for higher prices, even from that article (assuming these rumors are an accurate representation of what really happened). We don't know what the publishers were offering - they could have wanted to set the ebook prices to the same as hardcover prices. Also, the article says the price would only be for bestsellers, and that isn't what seems to be happening now, so there is some sort of information missing.

I would love to read more, if you see anything around the internet.

[llreader]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I think it was collusion between Apple and MacMillan that push this whole thing to the forefront. MacMillan clearly hates ebooks and is doing everything they can to kill them and preserve their print business. They hate the idea of library ebooks and the idea of discounted ebooks and particularly discounted ebook available at the hardback release date. They partnered with Apple to sell at the higher price and attempted to use that as leverage against Amazon. Amazon punched back. Only history will tell at this point who the survivors are.

But why would Apple want to kill ebooks? They don't publish paper anything, and they never will. They have been all about selling electronic media and the gadgets people use to "consume" it.

There is something missing in this story.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by bookwurm70

I don't think I've ever paid more than $15 for an ebook. Maybe I've paid $16, but that is about my limit. I know some books have been priced at $7.99 for print and $14.00 for ebooks. I won't buy those either. What I do instead is order them from PaperbackSwap.com and get them for free. You'd think the publisher would rather sell me the book for $8.00 than have me get it for free but that seems to be the choice they are making. I love PBS! It is like a legal "darknet".

I rarely buy a new paper book, certainly even more rarely a hardback, but spend a ton of money on Amazon used books from third party sellers. Neither the publisher or the author gets any benefit from that. I'd prefer an ebook and am willing to pay a reasonable price for it, but when you can buy a used paper copy for 1 cent (plus shipping) or even for $7.99 that's still a better deal than even a new $9.99 ebook but I am willing to pay that for the convenience of having it in ebook form (provided I can strip drm off of it).

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by llreader

But why would Apple want to kill ebooks? They don't publish paper anything, and they never will. They have been all about selling electronic media and the gadgets people use to "consume" it.

There is something missing in this story.

I'm not saying Apple wants to kill ebooks, they want to sell them and make money. If anyone wants to kill ebooks it's the traditional publishers because they are running scared that it will destroy their print business. My take on it is that they feel if the set the price of the ebook the same or more than the print version they will sell the print version and continue their revenue stream. If they sell a few ebooks at the same price (with drm) then they've made even more money.

[llreader]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I'm not saying Apple wants to kill ebooks, they want to sell them and make money. If anyone wants to kill ebooks it's the traditional publishers because they are running scared that it will destroy their print business. My take on it is that they feel if the set the price of the ebook the same or more than the print version they will sell the print version and continue their revenue stream. If they sell a few ebooks at the same price (with drm) then they've made even more money.

Yes, it is sad, but I think that is a possibility. I am hoping that one of them will make a break for the "low price / high volume" model, but it sure doesn't look like that is going to happen any time soon.

I was just wondering why Apple would want to destroy ebooks. If you see the posts above, I was questioning the idea that these changes have been orchestrated by Apple, because I don't see what they have to gain from killing the only book market they can participate in.

EDIT: Ooops, misread what you said.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by llreader

Yes, it is sad, but I think that is a possibility. I am hoping that one of them will make a break for the "low price / high volume" model, but it sure doesn't look like that is going to happen any time soon.

I was just wondering why Apple would want to destroy ebooks. If you see the posts above, I was questioning the idea that these changes have been orchestrated by Apple, because I don't see what they have to gain from killing the only book market they can participate in.

I agree that Apple had little to do with the pricing changes other than it was negotiating to get its ebook store up and running and from MacMillan's perspective everything came together to offer the opportunity to up the prices and thus protect their print business and gave them a tool to attack Amazon with.