|
One problem with this cozy little scenario: the DOJ is monitoring contract negotiations. And they have veto power over any contract. For at least three more years.
Any hint of coordination between the BPHs and they'll be back in court.
One of the points that got them in hot water during the conspiracy was the way the negotiated with Amazon: as soon as one of them got tentative agreement on a new concession, the others promptly demanded the same, even though the negotiations were supposed to be private. One of the reasons the BPHs (and their apologists) swear Amazon sic'ed the DOJ on them is that when the feds came calling, they turned over all the documents proving they'd colluded during the supposedly private and confidential negotiations.
This time, Hachette thinks they can achieve the same by negotiating in public and using the publishing press to coordinate.
Aside from the dubious legality of their goals (horizontal price fixing is illegal, regardless of how it is imposed) their biggest challenge is they have very little leverage on Amazon. (Last I heard) Amazon doesn't do pbook returns--they buy them outright--so they can't threaten to refuse returns, like they did to Borders, and Amazon doesn't need their payola--they routinely offer to give it up in return for lower wholesale pricing. And, to top it off, unlike 2010 Amazon makes at least as much money from their own titles and Indie titles as they do from the BPHs, combined. And books are, of course, a tiny part of their income (Right now, AWS is Amazon's cash cow, followed by the affiliated merchants) so a boycott won't hurt them.
And finally, even if the BPHs get agency back, they won't be hurting Amazon any. As the fallout from the conspiracy has proven, yet again, price fixing protects incumbents. And Amazon is the top incumbent so removing price competition simply changes the discussion to all the other ways Amazon outclasses their competitors.
All price fixing does is freeze movement across the various walled gardens when it comes to BPH titles. But BPH titles aren't anywhere near the totality of the book universe and it is, in fact, a shrinking part of the total market.
This obsession of the BPHs with agency falls under the heading of "be careful what you wish for...". The first time they imposed it it cost them hundreds of millions in fines above and beyond the reduced income for them and their authors atop the reduced unit market share.
By focusing on reader spend instead of net income for them and their authors they are cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Which will only leave them bloody and ugly while Amazon laughs all the way.
It is simply stupid.
|