Quote:
Originally Posted by disconnected
I'm still confused. I thought with agency titles Amazon never "bought" or "owned" the books but was just providing a storefront for the publisher and earning commissions.
|
I'm not saying this is what is happening, just throwing an idea into the wind of how both ends can be legally achieved:
Assume I am a publishing company named Pimon and Pooster. I am a division of a company named SBC Corporation.
The contract my authors sign stating that they get paid when I sell their books is with SBC Corporation (contract A). SBC Corporation then sells the book to Pimon and Pooster, thus enabling me to pay my authors the lower fee for sales.
Pimon and Pooster then employs Amazon as an agent to lease the same books to consumers (contract B), thus making both both contracts non-conflicting with each other for the simple reason that on-paper they involve two completely different sets of parties.
There's probably a ton of holes in this theory involving optimal inventory prediction and taxes at each step, making it unprobable, but it's plausible if the accountants and lawyers have figured out a profitable way to make it so.