04-08-2013, 05:47 AM | #181 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,841
Karma: 9547754
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Device: iPhone SE2020
|
Quote:
|
|
04-08-2013, 08:57 AM | #182 |
Wizard
Posts: 1,747
Karma: 3761220
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Device: T1 Red, Kindle Fire, Kindle PW, PW2, Nook HD+, Kobo Mini, Aura HD
|
Since I think Goodreads is in a lot better shape than Shelfari and has more membership, I would think that Amazon, if they do, would migrate Shelfari users over to Goodreads. Unless they do decide to keep both.
|
Advert | |
|
04-09-2013, 03:56 PM | #183 |
Fanatic
Posts: 556
Karma: 1057213
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Eastern U.S.
Device: Sony Reader
|
I am not sure if I may be considered a real Amazon hater, as I am often a customer of theirs. But I admit that given a decent choice I prefer to buy elsewhere.
Cannot see how Goodreads acquisition is anything but an anti-competitive move by Amazon.com. What were they looking for when considering whether to buy Goodreads? A better book review database? Well, i doubt it. Theirs is already the biggest, having been accumulated over almost 20 years of dominant Internet's presence. I believe, despite all usual claims to the contrary, Amazon will (1) direct the Goodreads members to Amazon for purchases and (2) cut off the competition from access to Goodreads user content database. My understanding of Goodreads business model is that it was a social network of book-lovers/readers, and in that respect parallel but very similar to Amazon's own product review system. Yes, it has some cataloging capabilities, i.e. "To Read" lists, progress meters, etc. They are also parallel to Amazon's own existing capabilities, and don't constitute any particular know-how worth millions of dollars anyway. What made Goodreads different was that as an independent online entity, it had not been actively driving members to make purchases at a particular vendor (Amazon?), but rather offered a choice of competitive purchase links. Also, it could license access to the user-generated content (reviews) to anyone willing to pay: Google Books, Google Shopping, Kobo, Sony, Apple, etc. I don't know how many vendors could afford to incorporate Goodreads reviews into their bookstores, but I believe some did. In my opinion, product review databases are the holy grail of Internet shopping, and he who owns the biggest and the best, owns the customers. What business sense does it make for Amazon to continue the current Goodreads business policies? About as much as it made for Borders to outsource its online operations to Amazon when it did it at the end of 90's. Only Amazon is not run by delusional fools, while Borders was. So, my personal hunch is that Amazon is buying Goodreads to either kill it, or to use it like IMDB to generate business. Pretty good for Goodreads backers and stockholders, bad for its members and very bad for general public. Amazon being a one-stop shop for everything is OK with me. Amazon being the only game in town - not so much. Last edited by porkupan; 04-09-2013 at 04:38 PM. Reason: grammar |
04-09-2013, 04:35 PM | #184 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,732
Karma: 128354696
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 26 kly from Sgr A*
Device: T100TA,PW2,PRS-T1,KT,FireHD 8.9,K2, PB360,BeBook One,Axim51v,TC1000
|
Quote:
There is also the reality that if an independent Goodreads can (ever) generate revenue from non-Amazon customers as a competitor those revenues will go to Amazon coffers and not to B&N or Random Penguin or Author Solutions. Plus, there is more to modern retail than just marketting--convincing people to buy what you have for sale. There is also the flip-side: market research, finding out what consumers want that you are not already offering. As an independent operation, GR has access to stats and reviews from non-Kindle customers which can be useful for figuring out how those folks think and what they want. That would be pretty valuable market research right there. Me, I'm of the opinion that Amazon bought Goodreads primarily to keep its enemies from buying it. It was in play and somebody was going to buy it; better them than an enemy. Having achieved that, they don't need to do much else. Like a gambler on a streak, their best bet may be to just let it ride and see how far it goes... No need to be any more Machiavellian that that. |
|
04-09-2013, 07:43 PM | #185 | |
Fanatic
Posts: 556
Karma: 1057213
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Eastern U.S.
Device: Sony Reader
|
Quote:
I think Goodreads is more like Stanza or Mobipocket. Not really a business, more like a service, which is great only while it's free. And once you are paying for it, it is no longer so great. Can be a money pit if you let it be. Let's give it a year or so, and see where Goodreads is then. I think it will either be integrated into Amazon completely and thus dismantled, or it will be left "alone" (like IMDB) as a feeder service for book sales (only to Amazon), or possibly totally dismantled and done. Its user-generated content database will most probably be pillaged by Amazon, at which point Goodreads will not continue standing on its own as an online destination. Or it may be remade into an ebook store (integrated with Kindle store into this new entity, possibly selling content in both Kindle and EPUB formats). I don't believe in the charitable nature of any business, especially Amazon. There. Imagine this happening to Wikipedia. Being sold to Britannica, or Random Penguin, or Amazon, or Google... And then not exactly dismantled, but forced to make money, as that's all any business is interested in after all. If not today, tomorrow or the day after. I've seen it happen many times, and I have no reason to believe this time is different. Sooner or later it is going to happen to Wikipedia. |
|
Advert | |
|
04-10-2013, 03:51 AM | #186 |
Wizard
Posts: 1,841
Karma: 9547754
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Device: iPhone SE2020
|
That would be the most sensible option. However, after seeing how they have killed/crippled Stanza, and kept the Kindle app, instead of incorporating the best of Stanza into Kindle, or making Kindle books available in Stanza... I'm not that confident that good sense will prevail. ONly time will tell
|
04-10-2013, 08:23 AM | #187 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,732
Karma: 128354696
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 26 kly from Sgr A*
Device: T100TA,PW2,PRS-T1,KT,FireHD 8.9,K2, PB360,BeBook One,Axim51v,TC1000
|
Quote:
As opposed to making money for their venture capital investors. Goodreads has always been intended to be a money-making venture. The fact that they found investors suggests they had a plan to generate income and the fact the investors sold out (at a hefty profit) suggests there is *some* income coming in, with prospects for more. But prospects are not reality. If Amazon doesn't see the business case work out, they might indeed dismantle Goodreads in a year or two. If Amazon had not bought Goodreads and the business case didn't work out, they *also* would have been dismantled. And probably sooner than under Amazon. Only difference I see is Amazon is generally more patient with their properties than other players. As Bezos said, they're not afraid of a bit of red ink. With Sugar Daddy Amazon Goodreads might get a lot more time to prove their business case than they would with another buyer. Assuming another buyer could even be found. In some other alternate universe where Amazon didn't pick up Goodreads, they might be announcing the dismantling right now... As for Wikipedia: if they ever do cash in, I suspect the likeliest candidate would be Yahoo. |
|
04-10-2013, 08:33 AM | #188 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,732
Karma: 128354696
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 26 kly from Sgr A*
Device: T100TA,PW2,PRS-T1,KT,FireHD 8.9,K2, PB360,BeBook One,Axim51v,TC1000
|
Quote:
(Microsoft does it a lot--they buy a company not so much for the product but for the IP, their resources, their staff, and especially the execs and techies.) The big question about Stanza is: what about the people? Were they dumped on the street? Or are they spending their time twiddling their thumbs in their cubicles? Are they in charge of the iOS kindle app or other projects? Stanza itself is more than a piece of software; behind it there are algorithms, coding expertise, iOS expertise... Lots of value in that operation beyond an ebook reader app and Amazon has shown themselves to be extremely clever in finding value where others see none. Things are never cut-n-dry in the big leagues. |
|
04-10-2013, 09:23 AM | #189 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,841
Karma: 9547754
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Device: iPhone SE2020
|
Quote:
Before this, though, when we were trying to get them to do something so we could still keep using it, they (the CSRs) completely denied it was anything to do with Amazon. Clearly, the powers that were had no intention of continuing support, and had not even bothered telling the customer service people that anything other than a Kindle app existed. Things may not be cut and dried in the big leagues, but in this case, they were. |
|
04-10-2013, 09:40 AM | #190 |
Banned
Posts: 1,431
Karma: 5222495
Join Date: Jun 2011
Device: Nook Color, Entourage Pocket Edge, iPod Touch 5th Gen
|
Did Amazon also buy Woot? I got an email from Amazon this morning advertising a deal on the Samsung Galaxy Note tablet which stated I could purchase it through Woot. Then, at the end of the email, I was informed that I could now sign into Woot using my Amazon account.
This could be old news. I'm generally out of the loop when it comes to the wheeling and dealing of the corporate world. |
04-10-2013, 09:55 AM | #191 | ||
Fanatic
Posts: 556
Karma: 1057213
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Eastern U.S.
Device: Sony Reader
|
Quote:
Quote:
For Amazon books and ebooks may not be the primary business any more. They now sell and resell everything to everyone. An online "walmart", "nordstrom" and "ebay" - all in one. However, there is only one thing they actually make - Kindle. And not being afraid of "a bit of red ink" can mean only one thing: their long-term plan is to keep underselling everyone, until they are the only one left. Borders down, Amazon takes its business. Who is next? B&N. Will be done in a couple of years. I think to start really making money in books and ebooks Amazon needs to kill the remaining bookselling competition off. Goodreads acquisition may be part of this strategy. I hope it's anyone but Yahoo. Yahoo would take a month before filling Wikipedia up with ads and popups, and another half a year before the traffic starts falling off the cliff... |
||
04-10-2013, 10:34 AM | #192 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,343
Karma: 2786741
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Birmingham, AL
Device: Sony Reader PRS-T1, Kindle Touch, misc. Android devices, Nook HD+
|
Quote:
|
|
04-10-2013, 10:38 AM | #193 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,732
Karma: 128354696
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 26 kly from Sgr A*
Device: T100TA,PW2,PRS-T1,KT,FireHD 8.9,K2, PB360,BeBook One,Axim51v,TC1000
|
Quote:
(And don't forget Google is as much an ebook retailer as Amazon. Not as successful but just as interested in pushing their product to all comers. Maybe more precisely because they're not as successful.) The best non-Amazon fit I could think of myself would've been Facebook but they're more interested in reskinning Android into Windows Phone than hosting literary communities. Because they too are looking to monetize their "membership". As you said, that's the way of the world. For now. Change is constant, though. I'm just not convinced there was a better deal out there for the Goodreads folks *or* the site/community. And, back to Wiki-speculation: the only credible alternatives I see to yahoo are Google and AOL. Six of one, half a dozen of the other, no? The thing is, the only product Wikipedia (as a commercial venture) can call its own is its traffic. The eyeballs. They could put up a paywall, trying to sell or license the content but that would be...troubling? There's not much of a commercial venture there except as what it is: a communal encyclopedia funded by a non-profit. Any other model lands you in ad-land or a crap-storm. Last edited by fjtorres; 04-10-2013 at 10:40 AM. |
|
04-10-2013, 10:46 AM | #194 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,732
Karma: 128354696
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 26 kly from Sgr A*
Device: T100TA,PW2,PRS-T1,KT,FireHD 8.9,K2, PB360,BeBook One,Axim51v,TC1000
|
Going on three.
Interestingly enough, their rationale was similar to the Goodreads buy, reaching out to people who *weren't* well-served by teir existing webstore. Here's CBS' take at the time: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505124_1...-surprise-you/ Quote:
Last edited by fjtorres; 04-10-2013 at 10:48 AM. |
|
04-10-2013, 10:47 AM | #195 |
Philosopher
Posts: 2,034
Karma: 18736532
Join Date: Jan 2012
Device: Kindle Paperwhite 2 gen, Kindle Fire 1st Gen, Kindle Touch
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apple Tries To Acquire Dropbox for $800 Million, Dropbox Refuses | jocampo | News | 166 | 09-17-2011 02:06 PM |
ATT to acquire Tmobile | jocampo | News | 41 | 03-24-2011 05:56 PM |
Amazon to Acquire Audible.com | Nate the great | News | 10 | 02-03-2008 01:28 PM |
Taiwanese acquire Philips' e-paper unit | Alexander Turcic | News | 6 | 08-27-2005 02:10 AM |
Palm to acquire rival Handspring | Alexander Turcic | Lounge | 3 | 07-07-2003 03:48 PM |