Quote:
Originally Posted by cfrizz
So they can spin it any way they want to, but they are only shooting themselves in the foot trying so desperately to hold on to their overpriced ebooks & paper books.
|
Well, if it was true that they were shooting themselves in the foot, that wouldn't be the only thing they were doing. It would also mean they were leaving more consumer money on the table to be spent on products of small and self publishers. Are you against that?
Publishers pay people to pour over statistics to see what would be optimum prices. It slightly mystifies me why people here would think they know better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
Stop worrying about making money the way you WANT to make money, and just make money.
|
Why do you want them to make money? I just want them to do well enough to stay in the business of improving manuscripts I will want to read.
But for your benefit:
Citing continued benefits from the integration of Penguin and Random House, Pearson said its 47% stake in the world’s largest trade publisher earned 129 million pounds ($136 million) in operating profits for the company in 2016. The sum marks a 43% increase over 2015.
As I said, I don't see this as positive or negative. Losing lots of money year after year -- as in the newspaper industry -- now that is negative, since it results in less good reading material, especially regarding current affairs.