Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinisajoy
I don't need an article to determine that the Big 5 is doing what they think is best to make money.
Now yes, some readers do whine about the high price of books, paper and ebooks.
But except for certain places, the average reader may complain about the high prices but they don't go around accusing the publisher of falsely inflating a price to get the customer to buy something else.
I have only heard that from a very small group of people.
Now can you link me any article where the people running the big 5 say that they are marking up ebooks so the consumer will buy a paper book.
And I mean someone that can actually make that decision, not a former employee.
As I understand agency, it just means the publisher not the distributor sets the price.
That is fair if the sales are based on a percentage.
I don't know what you do for a living but how would you like it if your boss decided he could just pay you whatever he thought was best.
|
The Big 5 is of course doing what they think is best for their business. This encompasses attempting to divert sales to print, even if it means taking a lower profit now, which it does. Of course I don't think it is going to succeed, and there are already signs that it is not.
I don't think I need say anymore about the reasoning of "Except for certain places" where they do the rest they don't? My views on this matter are not obscure and in fact are quite common on the net, whether or not you have seen them.
I'm afraid Big 5 publishers don't usually explain there business decisions on the internet, any more than Amazon does, or virtually all commercial businesses, for that matter. The Price Fixing conspiracy litigation gave us a somewhat rare glimpse into their thinking at the time as the Conspirators and some of their executives forced to produce documents and give evidence. There behaviour since is consistent with their ideas at the time.
What I am giving you here is my own interpretation of the facts, which is shared by many others, both on this site and on the internet generally. It is not the only interpretation nor it is 100% certain that it is correct. To invoke the scientific method it is a hypothesis which has not, at least so far, been disproven.
As to your conclusion, I am fortunate enough not to have to answer to a boss. But the analogy is in any event worthless. Under the wholesale model the Publishers were selling the books to Amazon at a negotiated price. Amazon was then free to sell its property at whatever price it chose. The present system eliminates third party retailers and replaces them with "agents" who are not able to set prices. There is never a situation where payment is totally discretionary as per the analogy.