Stars fall in Amazon protest about ebook prices

[asjogren]

Once eBooks become dominant, I believe that full service Publishing Houses will decline. The replacement will be a service industry that serves authors via agents. Author's agents will have a larger role.

For up-front money (if wanted), I suspect there will be an opportunity for something like Venture Capital that emerges.

The Big Publishing Houses are too inefficient. And they pass over too many good opportunities. It is amazing how many who became top authors got turned down by 10 or more - only to have their first book become a best seller. Robert Ludlum is one. J.K. Rawlings.

I think the recent moves by the Big Publishing Houses show how quickly they will become small players. I think that to survive at all they will have to evolve and specialize. They will have to innovate their offerings to both authors and consumers.

And they have shown more interest in market control than innovation.

[Seli]

Originally Posted by bobavey

There is no doubt that e-books cost less to produce and, therefore, should be sold at a price that reflects the lower cost of production. However, it's not the author's fault that the publishers are overcharging.

But they are a lot cheaper. It is not the publisher's fault that the retailers sell the paper books which such a large discount.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Seli

But they are a lot cheaper. It is not the publisher's fault that the retailers sell the paper books which such a large discount.

It is the publishers fault that they prevent the retailers giving similar discounts on eBooks.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

It is the publishers fault that they prevent the retailers giving similar discounts on eBooks.

Not if the discount is not sustainable and have as a goal to eliminate competition.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by tompe

Not if the discount is not sustainable and have as a goal to eliminate competition.

What do you mean by "not sustainable"?

[leebase]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

You also have situations with "predatory pricing," where a company will intentionally lower prices in order to eliminate the competition -- which is pretty much what Amazon was doing prior to the agency model. However, it is worth noting that this is a very expensive strategy, and as such rarely works.

It's refreshing to you continue to stand up for sound economics. Too few on these forums have any understanding of how things really work.

Pricing is RARELY if ever about the cost of production. At most, and not always at that, production costs set a price floor.

The cost to produce a hard back book NEVER justified being 4 times the cost of a paper back book. It was then, as it is now -- DEMANAD pricing. A new book is in higher demand than a book that's been out for a year.

What is the cost difference between a new release movie you pay $11 bucks for -- or the SAME movie that your pay $3 to see at the cheap theaters 8 months later? Nothing. What do you have to explain the difference in price? Demand.

Clearly -- $12.99 to $14.99 has done very little to impact demand for books -- despite those who come on these forums and swear vengeance the publishers. It will never matter if 1,000 harpies on this forum declare they'll never pay more than 50 cents for an ebook when millions of folks are paying $12.99 for new release hit ebooks.

Tom Clancy is coming out with a new book for the first time in 10 years. I'm getting mine the first day, and I'm paying $14.99, and I'm just thrilled that I'm not paying $24 for the hard back -- not to mention not having to lug a hard back around.

So the harpies can rant and rail all they want. It's much noise signifying nothing whatsoever.

Lee

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by gollu

I don't understand people leaving 1-star rating for a price when they should be rating the content. If the price is too high - there are enough dark ways to obtain the book, and apparently that's the response the book industry will understand. Every person that doesn't buy the book because of its high price is a sale lost, $$ less income.
Then one can come back to Amazon and rate the book with 5 stars, while suggesting book was acquired in an alternative way.

I have no problem with downrating based on price, just like I have no problem downrating based on typos or printing errors. If every printed copy of a book reverses the left & right pages, I'd have no problems with one-star ratings. If someone writes the equivalent of a Harlequin romance--a formulaic plot with fairly standardized characters, enjoyable to people who like the genre and considered worthless by people who don't--and charged $39.95 for it, I'd expect to see one-star ratings that indicate this book is not worth its price--which doesn't mean "the contents are awful."

A one-star rating can mean "this is a waste of money," not "this is an awful read."

Most people at Amazon review the content, not the specific edition, but that doesn't mean the edition should be above complaint. A book riddled with formatting errors is a waste of my time and money just as much as one with bad characterization and a weak plot. A book that costs as much as four other books I'd enjoy just as much is also a waste of my resources.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

Until the cabal made their demands, Amazon acted fully as a retailer. They purchased ebooks from the publishers at the wholesale price the publishers set, and sold them to the end-users at the price they (Amazon) set. That's what a retailer does: buys wholesale, sells retail.

A retailer does not sell every in demand product at a loss. A few loss leaders to get people in the doors, sure. But Amazon sold every NYT Best Seller book below wholesale -- every day.

That's predatory pricing and it's not good for anyone but Amazon who was trying to corner the market -- and largely succeeded.

Lee

[leebase]

Originally Posted by orwell2k

Why not do both? Just as a form of protest, use the star system as a weapon rather than 'following the rules'.

Stick it to the publisher by making it clear there are alternative sources for the content that is so highly valued, and bias the overall 'quality stats' of the product the publisher is trying to push to pehaps turn future cutomers away.

Because you aren't just "sticking it to the publishers" -- you are interfering with USERS who come to amazon to research books they might like to buy.

When I'm doing that, I don't give a flying fig about what YOU think of a publisher's pricing policies. I want to know if the content of a book is something I might be interested in.

I know what the price is already -- I don't need your commentary on the price. I don't need the star system to tell me how expensive a product is as the PRICE tells me that.

By participating in this childish effort, the most likely people impacted are not the publishers -- but your fellow readers.

And it's too bad, really....that folks are so inconsiderate of others in protests like this.

Lee

[brecklundin]

Something Amazon could do with the ratings is break out into to distinct options. Use a rating for the content as well as one for price paid and if you choose to rate based on price only verified purchasers of the book will be allowed to do so.

I think that is fair to the author and lets buyers express the satisfaction about the price paid. I think this works because while a price might be high a buyer might have paid it reluctantly simply because they wanted to read it soonest. In fact many here have without knowing it, expressed that very opinion. Also, if one rates the price, the price that person paid should be displayed to help maintain perspective relative to the current price which could well be lower.

Print books, I feel that right now a far better value when looking at price alone. It's just hard to pack half a dozen books for a vacation or business trip.

Also, to those who feel the convenience of instant delivery and ability to carry multiple books on a small device is not a function of the ebook but is something we pay for when we buy the e-reader device. So I don't see that as a feature of an ebook since some people might be reading only on their computer. Publishers should not be able to collect a premium for a format that would only be possible with the reader device itself.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by leebase

When I'm doing that, I don't give a flying fig about what YOU think of a publisher's pricing policies. I want to know if the content of a book is something I might be interested in.

The people who chose this method to protest are the same people who offer their opinions when there is nothing to protest about. And they don't rate something according to your needs.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

The people who chose this method to protest are the same people who offer their opinions when there is nothing to protest about. And they don't rate something according to your needs.

The rating system is there as a collective buyer's guide. It's a nice service but childish protests only succeed in devaluing the service for everybody.

Perhaps that's why Amazon bought a diaper company, to serve the needs of these protest cry babies.

Lee

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by leebase

The rating system is there as a collective buyer's guide. It's a nice service but childish protests only succeed in devaluing the service for everybody.

The ratings wouldn't have fallen unless there were enough people that thought that this is a good idea, which essentially means that your opinion is in minority, and the system works in the way the majority uses it.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by leebase

The rating system is there as a collective buyer's guide. It's a nice service but childish protests only succeed in devaluing the service for everybody.

Perhaps that's why Amazon bought a diaper company, to serve the needs of these protest cry babies.

Lee

It's a method of protest that has been successful in the past with companies that actually care about their customer's opinions. In this case I think they're just wasting their time because the publishers obviously don't care.

[Worldwalker]

Amazon's rating system is, in large part, broken. How many terrible books have we seen that got 5-star ratings from the author's family and friends, for instance? I've heard of the same family-and-friend packs giving one-star "revenge ratings" to books written by people who were honest about those disasters, too. There are sites I trust for book reviews (MR being one of them) but Amazon ratings aren't one of them.

I still can't forget the guy who gave a one-star rating to a large fish tank because he found it difficult to pour all the water out of it and sterilize its contents every week -- something which, as any tropical fish keeper can tell you, would give him a permanent case of "new tank syndrome" and never, ever an established tank. This probably explained his dead fish. I've seen books rated up because readers liked other books by that author, and rated down because they hated them, irrespective of the book in question. I saw a very good book light rated down by someone who bought some other item from one of the vendors who sold that book light (not that light, and not that vendor ... no, it doesn't make sense to me either) and it didn't work. And that's just touching the surface. The text of individual reviews can be very useful, but the overall star rating seems to be heading for "useless" with jato assist.