Amazon’s $23,698,655.93 book about flies

[kjk]

http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=358

A few weeks ago a postdoc in my lab logged on to Amazon to buy the lab an extra copy of Peter Lawrence’s The Making of a Fly – a classic work in developmental biology that we – and most other Drosophila developmental biologists – consult regularly. The book, published in 1992, is out of print. But Amazon listed 17 copies for sale: 15 used from $35.54, and 2 new from $1,730,045.91 (+$3.99 shipping).

Pretty interesting article about how book sellers are using algorithmic pricing to stay competitive.

[elcreative]

And dropshippers have been doing this since about 10 minutes after Amazon allowed third party sellers to use the system... results in some great prices as shown in the example cited... and illustrates the stupidity in allowing computers to control some things with stupid open-ended feedback loops...

[Andrew H.]

Very interesting article and comments; particularly the suggestiong that the higher priced (and higher ranked) seller may not actually have the book and, if ordered, would order it from the lower seller, mark it up, and then sell it to the buyer.

Although some of the comments suggest that this kind of behavior is wasteful and adds no value, they are not correct - people are more than willing to pay somewhat more for an item to purchase it from a more reliable seller. I will almost always choose to buy something from Amazon, for example, even if it is slightly more expensive, because I know that Amazon will deliver the item promptly, that they will resolve any difficulties I might have with the delivery, and because I can minimize the number of people who have my personal information.

[jgaiser]

Does it come with the Brooklyn Bridge?

[Fbone]

People have noticed prices increasing after they place item on their wishlist.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Although some of the comments suggest that this kind of behavior is wasteful and adds no value, they are not correct - people are more than willing to pay somewhat more for an item to purchase it from a more reliable seller....

I would say that claiming you have a book in stock (as the higher priced seller does), when you do not actually have the book, and only plan to purchase another copy and resell it, doesn't offer any value at all. (Of course, we don't know for sure if that's the case.)

Of course, that's one issue of buying used -- caveat emptor, even when the seller is using a large company as an intermediary.

[crich70]

I wager they don't sell many copies. Funny thing about pricing sometimes. I mentioned a book over at Smashwords "Jane's Free Guide" http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/44057 after downloading a copy and reviewing it around feb. 25th this year and shortly thereafter it went from free to .99 for a copy so it's not just Amazon that might be doing it. Either I caught the book just after she'd uploaded it to Smashwords (and before the price was set) or the attention it got after I posted about it here got her attention. I don't know which.

[CTH]

I wonder if there is any books that has two sellers that both has a 0.998 of the lowest price, if so the book would become cheaper and cheaper

[elcreative]

Lots... but not as many as there used to be because it rapidly results in the book descending to the 1p price point (or 1¢ for non-UK users) and a lot of users (of auto-repricing software) finally realised this and decided selling all their stock at this price just might be counter-productive.

Originally Posted by CTH

I wonder if there is any books that has two sellers that both has a 0.998 of the lowest price, if so the book would become cheaper and cheaper

[Worldwalker]

A highly-rated seller does add value.

I'll use an offline example: I recently purchased two water plants. One came from a big-box store; a plant identical in name came from a local nursery. The one from the big box store was cheaper by almost a third. But ... the damn thing still hasn't grown; essentially, I bought a flowerpot. Next time, I'm not going to bother with the big box store, despite their being cheaper (and having water plants earlier, which is really what seduced me); I know the ones from the nursery are healthy and thriving.

It's the same thing with ratings: I'll pay extra to know I'm getting what I paid for (and I'm actually getting it). If two vendors have an out-of-print book I'm looking for (and actually, I bought a half-dozen last week for a project, so this isn't just hypothetical) I'll pay extra for the one with the 100% rating instead of the 90% rating, not just because I don't want the hassle of being the one person out of ten who's unhappy with their purchase, but because I know the higher-rated seller is making sure that their customers are happy, and avoiding hassles in the first place is the best way for them to do that.

I actually paid $10 extra for a book (yeah, a fairly scarce one) and one reason was to buy from a more reliable seller -- the cheaper seller had complaints about the grading and quality of their books, and when you're buying a used book, you're trusting the vendor on grading, so that was a big turn-off right there.

So, yeah, a high rating does add value. You know you're really going to get your book, and it's going to be what the vendor says it is. Like my water plants, the one that grew and the expensive flowerpot, it makes a big difference.

[elemenoP]

Yes, seller rating does have a lot of meaning and I can be more concrete than the plants example (which was great, don't get me wrong). I buy used books on Amazon and I find that sellers vary a lot in how they describe the condition of the book. Specifically, some vendors actually LOOK at the book and try to gauge its condition (like new, good, etc), some (even better!) give some notes about the book's condition in the item description. Other sellers will simply list every book as new or like new, no matter the actual condition. I have been burned that way. So not only will I look at the seller's rating, I will look in the comments and see what people have to say about the condition of the books they received. I will pay more for a seller with good comments.

(and by the way, Worldwalker, Lowe's actually guarantees their plants for a year, I think, so if the poor-performing plants were from Lowe's, take them back!)

eP

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

I would say that claiming you have a book in stock (as the higher priced seller does), when you do not actually have the book, and only plan to purchase another copy and resell it, doesn't offer any value at all.

Isn't that just called being a broker? You pay me a premium to find a source and deliver to you, and the added value is you trust me to get you want you want as I say I will, while you have no idea which of the various other sources to trust at all.

It seems a little shady when it's not openly described that way, but that's the idea, yes?

ApK

[Rich_D]

CNN.com picked up the story. CNN

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by elemenoP

(and by the way, Worldwalker, Lowe's actually guarantees their plants for a year, I think, so if the poor-performing plants were from Lowe's, take them back!)

They were. But I can't find the verdammt receipt.

[crich70]

Isn't that always the case? A person buys something and either it seems to go clunk right after the return period ends or you look round and can't find the receipt that proves you bought item x at store y on such and such date. Makes you wonder if stores employ gremlins sometimes.

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

They were. But I can't find the verdammt receipt.