|
"3. Apple drove the bus on the negotiations as to the pricing model. Apple proposed a move to the agency pricing model on a "take it or leave it " basis. Penguin initially proposed doing business with Apple on the wholesale pricing model but Apple summarily rejected that."
ummmmm So aren't they basically saying it was Apple's fault? So Apple wanted Agency pricing, at maybe a different point in time than DOJ says. Penguin proposes the wholesale model. Apple says no and then we some how end up with five of the 6 publishing houses adopting the Agency model with a most favored nation clause for Apple at the exact same time.
A fall in hardware prices is a good thing. I fail to see how that should be counter balanced by an increase in e-book prices. So you pay less for the device and you should be happy to pay more for buying the thing you use the device for? Two different businesses are making money here. The Publishers are not selling e-readers so they are hurt by the decline in device prices. If anything, they were helped because less expensive ereaders meant more people buying e-books which means more money for them.
So the sellers of e-readers are making less because the hardware dropped and the seller of e-books raises the price of e-books, a different company, benefits by having more people to buy books and then admits that they made less money when they reaised the prices of e-books.
Call me confused.
Not to mention, E-reader prices were falling before the IPad was released. I am sure they fell more after the release of the IPad but the reality is that many people were discussing the magic $99 price point well before there was even discussion of the IPad.
|