Quote:
Originally Posted by calibrated
But all of the foregoing is missing the point I was trying to make, which is that both parties are being rather pigheaded. Failure of B&N to stock Amazon-published books isn't going to draw me into their stores any more than the failure of Amazon to permit legal sales through the Nook store (or Feedbooks, Google Books, etc.) will get me to buy a format I don't prefer from the Kindle store. It's really just a p*ssing contest between the two, and neither of them is doing the book world, or readers, any favors thereby.
|
This isn't about B&N trying to draw you into their stores. You weren't going to buy the book from B&N anyway, because you buy e-Books and B&N has been blocked from that by the Kindle exclusivity deal. People like you
are not affected by this announcement. People like you
were affected by the preceding "Amazon will not let B&N sell e-Book versions" announcement.
This is a move to signal to the AUTHORS that Amazon Publishing is not in their best interests. B&N is saying, "OK, so you're fine with being exclusive to the Kindle? Then you also get to be okay with not going into a bookstore and seeing your book on the shelf. How is that
better for you than going through CreateSpace* and NOT signing the exclusivity agreement, again?"
* Amazon Encore and CreateSpace are not the same thing. Just in case there are people here who don't realize that.
If being the next Twilight or Hunger Games is
dependent on b&m displays,
then authors signing up for Amazon publishing are now effectively going to have to abandon that dream when they sign up. Many will choose to, and that's their right, but B&N should not be compelled to help Amazon put them out of business.
As an indie author, this affects
me. (And others. But my point is that B&N is talking to authors here, not consumers.) And I am tentatively in favor of the decision.