Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
Some readers will read whatever is cheap or available and don't really care about authors, just like some TV views turn on the TV and watch whatever is on, rather than have a favorite program. However, I suspect that is not the sort of consumer that companies really go after.
|
Let's see how this worked. Books were always sold wholesale and retailers were allowed to discount to their heart's content. How do you think Barnes & Noble ran out all the Mom & Pop bookstores all over the country? (Or have we forgotten that already?) The author's royalty was factored in per unit (remember, Amazon was not paying less for the book) so the harm to the author is in the "hypothetical" "only if you fall for the BS" argument that -- somehow -- selling more eBooks would harm authors. Then Apple appeared. Apple, who's been unsuccessfully suing Android since its inception because it wanted a monopoly on smartphones and tablets (who successfully patented "rectangles with corners"), that paragon of that virtue and promoter of the "open market," wanted to get a big chunk of the eBook sales (like they had gotten in MP3 sales). The scheme they pitched to the publishers is -- "make us your go-to retailer (instead of Amazon) and we'll collude to get the prices up on eBooks, so you can -- theoretically -- sell more paperbacks and hardbacks." The Colluding Six, none too happy with some of Amazon's moves -- including starting their own publishing wing, where more authors could get work (ahem!) -- were all too happy to join in on the scheme, figuring Apple was big enough to fend off the Justice Department. Well, alas, it was just too transparent of anti-trust move and it didn't work. Boo hoo for the Colluders. Finally the Justice Department worked for the people. It must have been a freak accident.
So this is good news -- unless you equate price gouging with an "open and fair market." I don't but, hey, I'm weird that way.