Quote:
Originally Posted by Grumpyreader
I think one of the big issues for the OFT will be whether the relationship between the publisher and the retailer is that of wholesaler and seller (i.e. the seller is buying stock himself but is free to sell on stock at whatever price he wants) or whether the retailer will be designated an "agent" of the publisher (and therefore selling for the first time on behalf of the publisher).
If it's the former then the Model could be anti-competitive. However if its the latter (as no doubt the publishers will argue) then it might not be anti-competitive as the retailer simply steps into the shoes of the publisher, who can then dictate the price at which a product can be sold. I don't think the phrase "Agency Model" is an (un)happy coincidence.
|
right. as of this point in time each publisher has set themselves up as a consignment seller situation with the various online book sellers functioning as only a venue and delivery system. This should be fine if it cannot be shown there was collusion between the publishers and Apple, remember Apple's Jobs was said to be in deep conversations with publishers at, I forget but I think it was CES 2009 or CeBIT. Not 100% sure when it happened but the conversations took place right when some device was announced followed right away by the announcement of the new Agency Model agreement. It was very suspicious that the biggest five publishers all moved to the same model at the very same time. That is where Apple played a role and comes into frame. Was Jobs upset with the model or was the the puppet master or just pissed he had been backed into a corner because off of the five presented the same agreement forcing him to agree if he wanted content for the Apple Store.
To me it would seem this is all far deeper than it seems on the surface. Obviously it was an attempt to strong-arm Amazon but I thought it then and even more now, the effects are going to be much further reaching than just ebook prices.