View Single Post
Old 07-23-2010, 04:32 PM   #47
DMcCunney
New York Editor
DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
DMcCunney's Avatar
 
Posts: 6,384
Karma: 16540415
Join Date: Aug 2007
Device: PalmTX, Pocket eDGe, Alcatel Fierce 4, RCA Viking Pro 10, Nexus 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by murraypaul View Post
Accepting these two statements as true,

... This statement does not neccesarily follow. It was suggested that Amazon sell proportionally less hardbacks than paperbacks compared to B&M stores. You are just stating that it is not true. Without figures from Amazon it can't be proved one way of the other.
No, I did not. Amazon sells both hardcover and PB releases. I would expect their breakdown of HC vs PB sales to be in line with Barnes and Noble, Borders, or any other retailer (like, say, CostCo or Sam's Club, who sell enormous numbers of books.)

Agreed, without actual sales figures from Amazon, nothing can be really proved. But I don't see Amazon's position as a catalog retailer operating over the Internet having any impact on the exact mix they sell. They sell books. Customers buy them. I see no reason for the breakdown between hardcover and paperback sales to be different for Amazon than for any other retailer, and don't assume it is.
______
Dennis

Last edited by DMcCunney; 07-23-2010 at 05:29 PM.
DMcCunney is offline   Reply With Quote