Barnes & Noble Stores Will Not Stock Books Published By Amazon

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

Are not publishers....

See below.

Originally Posted by anamardoll

I think he's using libraries of an example of a place that publishers do not sell to.

Correct; and thank you

[tubemonkey]

Remember, there are two groups of people who can stop Amazon dead in its tracks on this issue - authors and consumers. So why don't they?

[cHex]

I just don't see what the big deal is.

I've never known of a one-stop shop of any kind where I could get all the books I want to buy: not a mom-and-pop bookstore, not a super bookstore like B&N, not Amazon.com, not a used bookstore (no matter how many acres), not a campus bookstore, not a trade show, not a library--nowhere.

Apparently, this situation is going to continue. Yawn.

Further, it seems people are all looking out for their own interests as they perceive them--authors, publishers, retailers, and consumers included. Imagine! I do the same, of course. I predict that Publishing As We Know It will be different someday than it was before, in fact I could make some suggestions, but chances are everyone will work things out for themselves, with a little arm-twisting by some governments (and the smart money should be on whomever donates the most to the super-PACs). Yet somehow, when the dust clears, I suspect I'll still be reading what I consider good stuff, cheaper and more conveniently than I was 5 years ago.

I love Amazon.com, though I wish they would do some things differently (the thing I hate the most is 1-click buying that doesn't let me use some payment options); I love Barnes & Noble, though I wish their prices were lower and they more often had the book I was looking for; I love the corner used bookstore, though I wish they refreshed their stock more often; I love a couple of specialty bookstores, though I wish they were closer. Interestingly, none of these entities have yet consulted me on how they should do business. Oh well, guess I'll just buy something and move on.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Nothing wrong with that. It's the nature of business.

And how are consumers hurt? Paper versions still exist. Besides, not everyone can afford an ereader; Kindle or otherwise. What of them?

Which paper copies are we talking about again? The ones that are NOT for sale in B&M stores? The ones you can only get if you go online?

That does hurt consumers.

[calibrated]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

The fact that you even bring up "but I have a Nook app on the Kindle Fire!" makes me think that you do not understand that Amazon Encore is refusing to sell their e-book versions anywhere except the Kindle store.

I understand that perfectly well, which is why I think Amazon is being pigheaded.

If B&N helps Amazon Encore, they hurt Nook store purchasers.

If B&N sells paper Amazon books in their stores, they're providing a service to their paper-book customers. If they refuse to carry them, they may or may not be denying those customers the opportunity to buy the paper editions, but they sure as h*ll aren't giving people a reason to come into their stores and spend their money with B&N. Put another way, if they sell the paper books, they do a disservice to their Nook customers, and if they don't, they do a disservice to their paper book customers, so they have to decide which set of customers is more important to them. Apparently, it's the Nook customers.

However, the Nook edition isn't going to be available either way (which is Amazon's fault, and remember, I'm not in favor of Amazon's stance here), so they can either make some money selling the paper version, or make no money. It's their choice. I happen to think it's also pigheaded, but it's their company, not mine.

Meanwhile, if authors choose to publish through a service that denies them the opportunity to sell their paper books at B&N, then I think they have some responsibility there as well.

If B&N expends resources to buy up Amazon Encore paper books to place in their b&m stores, thereby making Amazon Encore look like a good prospect for e-publishing indie authors, then B&N is directly helping to keep e-books off the Nook Store for their readers.

As opposed to keeping paper books out of the brick-and-mortar store for their readers.

I'm confused as to why this is confusing to you. I will answer the bolded part of your comment in bold letters:

BOOKS PUBLISHED BY AMAZON ENCORE CANNOT BE GOT ON THE NOOK. BECAUSE OF AMAZON.
Hence the Tinkers Dam being given.

Oops.. That's what I get for trying to follow this thread at work, type out replies and still be moderately productive. I had a momentary lapse. Sorry.

As for your suggestion that B&N should make its OWN publishing arm and do the same thing... *shudder* That would be reprehensible to me. The last thing we need is author exclusivity wars.

You know, I actually think we want the same thing here, we've just been talking at cross-purposes. I don't much care for author exclusivity, platform exclusivity, or any other exclusivity. I want open formats, more choice, and Books Available Everywhere. That's a win for authors, publishers, and consumers.

However, I think that if you're going to go to war (as Amazon and B&N appear to be), then you should bloody well go to war. Don't just throw a tantrum, do something to go on the offensive and take back some of the ground you've lost. Until B&N offers a better way, an alternative to Amazon's tools--and they don't need to be B&N-exclusive, BTW--then they're just being reactive, not proactive, and I don't have a lot of sympathy for them.

[calibrated]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Remember, there are two groups of people who can stop Amazon dead in its tracks on this issue - authors and consumers. So why don't they?

An excellent point.

Actually, I'm doing what I can as a consumer. I bought their apparently subsidized Kindle Fire, but I'm using it to read epubs in Aldiko that I buy from Feedbooks, Google Books, and a couple of overseas retailers who shall remain nameless. I may have started my ebook collection with the Kindle, but I'm not going to stay locked into that ecosphere, or support efforts at monopolization.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

I look at it this way. eBooks are not an essential item needed for daily living. Therefore, IMO, monopoly laws are irrelevant. Publishers are free to do as they please.

One could say the same thing about phones and cable television, but I believe both have been trust-busted in the past in America.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by calibrated

Oops.. That's what I get for trying to follow this thread at work, type out replies and still be moderately productive. I had a momentary lapse. Sorry.

Happens to the best of us!

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

Which paper copies are we talking about again? The ones that are NOT for sale in B&M stores? The ones you can only get if you go online?

That does hurt consumers.

And IF they were available in a B&N store, what do the people of South Dakota do with only one store in the entire state?

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

One could say the same thing about phones and cable television, but I believe both have been trust-busted in the past in America.

Not phones, but certainly cable TV. That said, I'm aware that the law disagrees with my views on monopolies just like it does with my views on copyright.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Not phones, but certainly cable TV. That said, I'm aware that the law disagrees with my views on monopolies just like it does with my views on copyright.

Big bells and little bells not ringing bells?

ETA: Or that you think phones are a necessity?

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by calibrated

What I think is that B&N, instead of coming up with its own publishing solution for indie authors, is acting like a spoiled child, taking its ball and going home. It looks to me like they're missing an opportunity here.

Uh, B&N does have a publishing solution for indie authors.
It's called PUBIT.
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/u/pubi...ing/379002433/

Don't feel bad if you forgot about it.
Sometimes it seems B&N forgets about it.

They also have a print publishing business (Sterling Publishing) that they're trying to sell to raise money.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...038330902.html
Note that the WSJ says B&N has been in the publishing business since the 1970s.

So, of course, it is fine for B&N to be a retailer and a publisher but not Amazon.
Just as it is fine for B&N to sign up exclusive Nook content but not fine for Amazon to sign up exclusive Kindle content.

Yup! It's all just fine.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

So, of course, it is fine for B&N to be a retailer and a publisher but not Amazon.
Just as it is fine for B&N to sign up exclusive Nook content but not fine for Amazon to sign up exclusive Kindle content.

Nope, nothing wrong with it. At. All.

PubIt authors do not sign exclusivity agreements to stay off Kindles.

So the bold part of your comment is wrong.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by calibrated

An excellent point.

Actually, I'm doing what I can as a consumer. I bought their apparently subsidized Kindle Fire, but I'm using it to read epubs in Aldiko that I buy from Feedbooks, Google Books, and a couple of overseas retailers who shall remain nameless. I may have started my ebook collection with the Kindle, but I'm not going to stay locked into that ecosphere, or support efforts at monopolization.

Good for you. As for me, this issue doesn't affect my reading habits. I read mostly public domain, library books, misc free titles, and the occasional $1 Kindle special offers.

For me, reading is recreational and if something I want to read isn't available from those sources, then I pass on it and find something that is.

I know we disagree on this point, but I'm not bothered by exclusivity deals. That said, I like your approach and wish others would do the same. Keep up the fight.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Big bells and little bells not ringing bells?

ETA: Or that you think phones are a necessity?

I think they're a necessity in order to contact emergency services.