Quote:
Originally Posted by dedo
You don't need to know the costs structure to understand why B&N shouldn't be satisfied at all.
<snip>
B&N only showed that Nook is more price-sensitive than Kindle without stealing any actual/prospective market share (i.e. installed base) since Amazon replied immediately doing even better.
|
Uh, my point is/was that there is more to the market than Nook and Kindle.
(And that is true even in the US, to say nothing of the rest of the planet.)
They may very well *be* satisfied to poach on the *other* guys.
You know; Sony, Kobo (forced to throw in a gift card), Astak, Bookeen, whatever remains of iRex...
And they *may* be happy to preempt, maybe block; Samsung, Acer, Asus, iRiver, and other significant would-be CE players.
The ebook world doesn't revolve around Amazon and a Nook win doesn't *require* a Kindle loss. Even if it really was a two horse race, more sales are more sales regardless of the share number. Plus, a market that is mostly Amazon vs B&N suits B&N fine even if they gain no significant traction against Kindle. (Which they should. They *are* $30 cheaper on the WiFi side and there *are* a lot of people for whom WiFi is just as useful as 3G.)
I think it's a bit early to be saying they got nothing out of it.
