View Single Post
Old 08-02-2011, 11:20 AM   #91
=X=
Wizard
=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.=X= ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
=X='s Avatar
 
Posts: 3,671
Karma: 12205348
Join Date: Mar 2008
Device: Galaxy S, Nook w/CM7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolenka View Post
They backpedaled on the "must be the same price or lower" restriction, and that the app must provide a way to buy content if it is available elsewhere (you just can't link to the elsewhere). So it is possible that these retailers can throw Apple's cut on top of their pricing, as long as their contracts with the publishers allow them to. But nobody would honestly believe that would fly. Almost nobody would pay it, so why bother offering it?
I never felt Apple's policy was a means to extort more money but rather a power move to eliminate competition.

The policy in my eye has always been designed to push retailers out of the market and make iBooks the best experience and value.
For a retailer to comply with Apple's policy it must give up most of it's revenue, increase the price of books, or cut off it's ability to grow clientele.

Last year when they entered the market the eBook market was still small, since then it's grown and is starting to outsell hardbacks and paper books.

As the market continues to grow Apple wants to position themselves as a book seller leader.

=X=

Last edited by =X=; 08-02-2011 at 12:44 PM. Reason: fix grammer
=X= is offline   Reply With Quote