|
A bad argument that gets worse as it proceeds. I'm just not certain if Eisler doesn't have a clue or if he is a disingenuous shill for Amazon.
Now, will Amazon break up the current publishing cartel only to become a monopoly itself? I doubt it. The company's DNA is all about serving customers,
This claim has all the quality of the argument "he is a dictator, but he is a good dictator". This "DNA" can be replaced the very moment investors revolt and want to see a better return on their investment. Even in the digital age an entrenched market position isn't easily imperiled, otherwise we have happened to see it e.g. with Microsoft long ago.
Most of all I dislike the derogatory use of the term "legacy publishers". As much as I may dislike some of their business policies I am well aware of the fact that thanks to these "legacy publishers" we have the most abundant and accessible supply with high quality books we ever had in human history. What has Amazon publishing given us exactly up to now, except for successful mommy porn? If I have to decide on spending money on a book that I don't know yet and one is being published e.g. by Penguin and the other one is being published by Amazon, then I will still go with Penguin every day of the week.
|