View Single Post
Old 08-15-2011, 06:28 AM   #6
stonetools
Wizard
stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
stonetools's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,016
Karma: 2838487
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Device: Ipad, IPhone
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeremyR View Post
I don't get it.

Old model - company would sell Amazon (or whoever) an ebook license at fixed price, which they would then turn around and sell to the customer at whatever price the seller wanted.

Amazon would sell e-books below cost, generally $9.99 as a way to get people to buy kindles.

So they would sell the e-book license to Amazon for $12.99, Amazon would sell it for $9.99, and Amazon would lose $3.

Agency Model - Amazon, Apple, B&N, whoever, just works as a sales agent, taking a 30% cut of the purchase. Book prices hitting $12.99 and up and up and up.

Sure, there is an opportunity to gouge customers more, but isn't the cut to iBooks (the official e-book store, who would be the sales agent there) pretty much the same as it would for their own apps? 30%?

For $12.99 book, the sales agent gets ~$4, the publisher gets $9.

If they did it in the app, the publisher would get the $9, plus the $4 for being their own sales agent, but they'd have to turn around and give apple the $4 for the in app purchase.
No, they would not. As a publisher, they would be their own sales agent. Apple would take its 30% and the publisher gets to keep 70. That would be the publishers incentive to go that route. That's how the magazine publishers are doing it now.

Last edited by stonetools; 08-15-2011 at 06:32 AM.
stonetools is offline   Reply With Quote