Quote:
Originally Posted by leebase
No one saw harm in hard backs going for $25 and more, with paper backs selling for less a year later. I never (almost never) bought the expensive version of the books and never considered myself harmed for havingt to wait. I merely bought books I was interested in that we're priced what I was willing to pay.
I never felt there was a right to have the cost of my books subsidized by Amazon.
|
Before I bought an e-reader, almost all of my book purchases were second hand. I guess it could be argued that my books were subsidised by the original buyer, but I don't feel that I have a right to have my books subsidised. Now that I prefer ebooks, and they aren't available second hand, I pay more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by leebase
On the other hand...I do feel that having only one book store to choose from is far more troubling. How powerful did amazon have to be that every single one of the largest 6 publishers all HATED Amazons pricing of the publisher's product but not a single one of the could do anything about it?
That kind of power in one company is far more troubling to me. As such, Appke selling music is much more worrisome than Apple selling ebook a ever was. It's kind of funny as Apple was the one keeping music prices lower than the Labels wanted
|
Given that ebooks are a luxury, I still don't see why there is harm in only one bookstore being available. They could put prices up, or limit availability, but ebooks are still a luxury, so I don't see why that would be more or less of an issue.