|
Setting 9.99 for the entire NYT's best seller list all the time is way beyond “loss leader” and clearly was mentioned as a money losing strategy in the law suit.
It was such an anti-competitive program that all, of the big 5 publishers went to war over it. Apple refused to enter the market if Amazon was going to be allowed to sell all of the best sellers at a loss.
Amazon could have maintained the $9.99 price...but the books would have been time windowed...just like the paper back version has never come out during the new book high demand time window.
Amazon chose, AMAZON CHOSE, to accept publisher pricing rather than have their enooks time windowed. Clearly Amazon knew that most of the sales happen during the new book time window just as Apple new that it wasn’t worth becoming an ebook retailer of Amazon set the price at the “lose money” level.
Cote ruled against the Apple and the Publishers....but left Amazon's anti-competitive practice untouched. You can’t collide as a remedy to anti-competitive behavior. They should have sued Amazon. But.....look at Samsung....it’s well worth the billion dollar fine years from now in order to copy your way into a leadership position in the mean time.
|