View Single Post
Old 02-12-2010, 02:04 PM   #18
zerospinboson
"Assume a can opener..."
zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.zerospinboson ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
zerospinboson's Avatar
 
Posts: 755
Karma: 1942109
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Local Cluster
Device: iLiad v2, DR1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCF View Post
Well, I did bother reading the blog. And I found it very informative. I admit, it was the first entry I read on this subject, so perhaps it's my trusty nature, that says, there is some truth in what the man wrote. And if I try to summarize the price aspect of the entry, mr. Buckell stands for:

Dynamic eBook prices.

And there is a huge difference between permanently higher price (as I understand your post, please correct me, if I'm wrong), and price that starts high and drops as time passes.
Sure. The problem is that this is what he says; as he both has no reason to act (in the future) according to what he says here, and, more importantly, that MacMillan has no reason whatsoever to comply with his wishes about dynamic pricing, this post is very misleading in that it implies that his opinion on this matter actually matters.
The reason you don't give Publishers control over pricing is because they do not have access to the retail figures (unless they also demand access to that), or at best have access to retail figures that are weeks outdated. This results in an enormously less flexible market, which generally isn't very good for the products being sold in it.
Still, it's of course their prerogative to kill the market, but it doesn't really seem rational that they would want to do so.
zerospinboson is offline   Reply With Quote