Amazon's vertical integration/monopoly

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

You are completely missing the fundamental point of what I said.

Oh, okay. What was it?

[shalym]

Originally Posted by Rizla

But these are pages in books, right? I mean e-books btw. One person seem to be confused about that and think the poster is talking about paper books. As such, it is a way of selling (E)BOOKS!

These are (E)pages in (E)books, right? Did I miss something?

Yes, they are (E)pages in (E)books. However, it is NOT, a way of selling (E)BOOKS. (or a way of selling anything) It is a way of paying authors for books that have been borrowed, NOT SOLD. Amazon does not use the pay-per page method for books that are sold.

Is that clear enough?

Shari

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by shalym

Yes, they are (E)pages in (E)books. However, it is NOT, a way of selling (E)BOOKS. (or a way of selling anything) It is a way of paying authors for books that have been borrowed, NOT SOLD. Amazon does not use the pay-per page method for books that are sold.

Is that clear enough?

Shari

Noimp is absolutely right and you and the other guy have proved him right. You are compartmentalizing. Obviously Amazon is selling the commodity of books under the KU program. It is double-think to say otherwise, which is, I suppose, a form of compartmentalization. At it's most generous, it could be characterized as hair-splitting.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Urr, yes, Amazon does dominate the e-book market in the English-speaking world. I'm not sure of the reason for the rest of your rather heated post. Is it directed at me, or are you just throwing it out there?

Throwing it out there.
It was not directed at you. Well not the bottom of the post. The part about dominating was.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Noimp is absolutely right and you and the other guy have proved him right. You are compartmentalizing. Obviously Amazon is selling the commodity of books under the KU program. It is double-think to say otherwise, which is, I suppose, a form of compartmentalization. At it's most generous, it could be characterized as hair-splitting. But I think you need to see the overarching issue

So, if Amazon is selling books under the KU program, then libraries are also selling books. Is that correct? In both instances the books are being loaned to the user but the user does not get to keep them. In many countries (although not in the US) authors even get paid when their books are borrowed from the Public library (kind of like they do when someone borrows a book through the KU program).

I'd really be interested to hear whether or not libraries are also (obviously) selling books to their patrons, and if they aren't, then why is what they are doing different from what Amazon is doing? (...and please don't say that it's different because libraries are free...many many libraries charge people from out of state/out of country for access to materials)

Shari

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by shalym

(...and please don't say that it's different because libraries are free...many many libraries charge people from out of state/out of country for access to materials)

Shari

More importantly, you pay via your tax dollars.

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by shalym

So, if Amazon is selling books under the KU program, then libraries are also selling books. Is that correct? In both instances the books are being loaned to the user but the user does not get to keep them. In many countries (although not in the US) authors even get paid when their books are borrowed from the Public library (kind of like they do when someone borrows a book through the KU program).

I'd really be interested to hear whether or not libraries are also (obviously) selling books to their patrons, and if they aren't, then why is what they are doing different from what Amazon is doing? (...and please don't say that it's different because libraries are free...many many libraries charge people from out of state/out of country for access to materials)

Shari

Yeah, right. Amazon is like libraries. This is descending into the absurd.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Noimp is absolutely right and you and the other guy have proved him right. You are compartmentalizing. Obviously Amazon is selling the commodity of books under the KU program. It is double-think to say otherwise, which is, I suppose, a form of compartmentalization. At it's most generous, it could be characterized as hair-splitting. But I think you need to see the overarching issue

No KU books are not sold. They are borrowed. The subscribers do not get to keep the book.
I am now going to abuse Hugh Howey.
His Wool is $4.99.
If I borrow it and read all 530 pages, he will get roughly $2.50.
If I buy the book outright he will earn roughly $3.50.
Now the thing is if I borrow Wool and 9 other books, I have to return one before I can get another borrow.
So still not seeing an issue.

KU is Netflix but for books. The subscribers pay a fee to read all the eligible books they want with a limit of 10 at a time.

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

No KU books are not sold. They are borrowed. The subscribers do not get to keep the book.
I am now going to abuse Hugh Howey.
His Wool is $4.99.
If I borrow it and read all 530 pages, he will get roughly $2.50.
If I buy the book outright he will earn roughly $3.50.
Now the thing is if I borrow Wool and 9 other books, I have to return one before I can get another borrow.
So still not seeing an issue.

Right. I pay Amazon and they give books (in page-sized segments). But Amazon isn't selling me books under the KU program. K. Queue music from the Twilight Zone.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Right. Amazon isn't selling the commodity of books under the KU program. K. Queue music from the Twilight Zone.

No, they are not selling.
Let me put this another way:
If you borrow my TV to watch the Superbowl, is it now your TV or do you have to return it?
If I sell you my TV, can you keep it?

[shalym]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Yeah, right. Amazon is like libraries. This is descending into the absurd.

Go back and read what I said, please. I did NOT say that Amazon is like libraries, I said that the KU program was like libraries, because the books are loaned to the users, NOT SOLD.

Shari

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by shalym

Go back and read what I said, please. I did NOT say that Amazon is like libraries, I said that the KU program was like libraries, because the books are loaned to the users, NOT SOLD.

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

No, they are not selling.
Let me put this another way:
If you borrow my TV to watch the Superbowl, is it now your TV or do you have to return it?
If I sell you my TV, can you keep it?

Yeah, but you don't own books you "buy" from Amazon, KU program or not. So are you suggesting Amazon doesn't "sell" e-books?

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Yeah, but you don't own books you "buy" from Amazon, KU program or not. So are you suggesting Amazon doesn't "sell" e-books?

You were talking about KU which is totally different from buying e-books at Amazon.
And technically no they do not sell e-books, they sell the license to read the book.

I think we had a minor word choice problem.
You were talking about Amazon now pays by the page.
Yes, they do but not on the "ebook license" that a customer buys. Those are still paid on the selling price. 99 cents to $2.98 gets 35%. Over $9.99 gets 35%. $2.99 to $9.99 gets 70% less a delivery fee. There are some exceptions. A person can choose 35% across the board if the book is very large. Also some countries only pay the 35% royalty.

Note also that the author/publisher has the choice of being in KU or not being in KU.

Hope this clears up our misunderstanding.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Yeah, but you don't own books you "buy" from Amazon, KU program or not. So are you suggesting Amazon doesn't "sell" e-books?

You do, however own a license to those books when you buy them from Amazon (or from any other store, for that matter).

When you borrow a book using either KU or the public library you do not own a license to the book.

Clearer now?

Shari

[darryl]

Joe Konrath has his Zombie Meme’s. And now Mobileread has its very own Zombie thread! A thread that will just not die, despite the weight of rational argument against the OP’s arguments. Just when you think this thread is dead and buried and turn your back, the OP posts again and it rises, shambling, from its grave. This miracle is achieved not by voodoo or black magic but via the simple expedient of posting the same discredited arguments again as if they are new and uncontradicted. Because the OP rarely if ever engages with a counter-argument, in the apparent expectation that if such counter-arguments are ignored and your own arguments repeated often enough and loudly enough the counter-arguments will simply go away. Or perhaps if a long enough gap is left before posting again, we will all forget the uncontradicted counter-arguments. Reading the OP’s latest resurrection post one would think that none of the preceding discussion had ever occurred. I think the vast majority of us would prefer that this be a forum for rational argument and discussion, not prejudice and preaching.

@notimp. Amazon is not a monopoly! KFX, like Adobe’s new DRM, is a matter for concern. But the sky is not falling now. And this cultural development guardian type argument seems to me to be little more than a pretixt to protect vested interests at the expense of the consumer. Amazon is probably better and certainly no worse than the large publishers so far as preservation of culture is concerned, unless you limit culture to require a plethora of protected bricks and mortar bookstores. And the issue of “plurality of public opinion”, as you put it, has been somewhat topical with the recent Authors United sham debate. It is simply ridiculous to argue that legacy publishing, which rejected 99% of works submitted to them, is better for the free expression of ideas and optinions than publishing with Amazon, which allows virtually anyone to publish. Please feel free even now to actually engage.

@Rizla. Nice to see you make your appearance in this thread with the ridiculous proposition that lending is the same as a sale or, for that matter, a permanent or indefinite license.