“We’re in Amazon’s Sights and They’re Going to Kill Us”

[MichelleR]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

When you can see a slow-moving freight train coming at you from miles distant, perhaps you should come up with a plan that includes contingencies other than sitting down in the middle of the tracks and weeping.

Wow, I've said almost the same thing!

I see the threat approaching and so I think I'll just call all my friends and complain about it, while sticking my hand up in a futile "stop" gesture. That should be sufficient.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by JAcheson

Meanwhile, Baen continues to thrive, having embraced ebooks long ago.

Really? How much profit do they make?

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by JAcheson

Meanwhile, Baen continues to thrive, having embraced ebooks long ago.

Do we know that for sure? I've often wondered if at some point they'll have to do some kind of price changes for non-backlist books as ebooks become more and more popular and print sales drop.

[morriss003]

"In all their years as gatekeepers the traditional publishers got so used to calling all the shots they lost sight of the fact that they are just middlemen. Just like the agents. Just like the retailers. They are just service providers. They don't actually *own* the product or the market." fjtorres

This is true, but I can't help noting that, since Amazon is also a middleman, a well known author might, at some point, offer up a manuscript for bid to the web company who will take the lowest cut. In the future, we might see Amazon, Google, Facebook and others having to bid for the right to be the middleman.

[GlenBarrington]

Originally Posted by morriss003

"In all their years as gatekeepers the traditional publishers got so used to calling all the shots they lost sight of the fact that they are just middlemen. Just like the agents. Just like the retailers. They are just service providers. They don't actually *own* the product or the market." fjtorres

This is true, but I can't help noting that, since Amazon is also a middleman, a well known author might, at some point, offer up a manuscript for bid to the web company who will take the lowest cut. In the future, we might see Amazon, Google, Facebook and others having to bid for the right to be the middleman.

I don't think that is quite the same thing. "publishing" without Amazon is quite possible and still done, Authors use Amazon or their competitors because of convenience, not because they are the only game in town.

True, one could theoretically self publish with paperbooks, but the level of investment in knowledge, and inftrastructure between self publishing a paperbook and an ebook is significantly different. And enough to make it impractical.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by morriss003

This is true, but I can't help noting that, since Amazon is also a middleman, a well known author might, at some point, offer up a manuscript for bid to the web company who will take the lowest cut. In the future, we might see Amazon, Google, Facebook and others having to bid for the right to be the middleman.

That is in fact *common* in the service industries.
They're called RFPs: Request for Proposal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Request_for_proposal

When you have a job that needs doing, you publish the list of requirements (could be as simple as a one paragraph description), the contact info, and the terms of evaluation. Bids come in and you choose a few candidates to interview and negotiate with.

This is not unknown in the publishing industry (most recently there was the Hocking auction) but its been uncommon. Moving forward, it's going to become common. And deadly for the BPHs.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by sbroome

The reality is that their publishing model is designed to make less money because they're making it elsewhere.. as middle men.

No. It's not about them making money elsewhere in the Amazon empire; it is about their *costs* being lower.
You're assuming their costs are the same as for the BPHs and they simply cover the costs from other sales.
That. Is. Not. The. Case.
It is not about revenues and profits; the game is *costs*.

More importantly: look to everything I said.
Amazon is *not* the only "new publisher" out there.
There's dozens. Some high visibility, like Open Road, some less so, like Rosetta, some flying under the radar.
They all share an ebook-first model and they are *all* way lower in overhead than the glass tower publishers.

The traditional publishers have Amazon on the brain and don't understand Amazon Publishing is just playing *their* game.

The way *bigger* threat is coming from the upstream side, the agents and authors. And the New Publishers that are playing the *new* game. The more time they waste fretting over Amazon's dinky, unproven catalog, the more time they are giving to the New Publishers to grow, position themselves, and go after the established authors. If they don't have *their* cost structure in a productive and value-adding level when the next wave of name author contracts start to expire, they are going to see who their real foes are.

Pottermore is the benchmark I'm looking to. And I'm sure everybody on the creative side is too. Rowling was gracious/conservative enough to give Bloomsbury a role in Pottermore. She can afford it.

Other name authors may not be that old-school friendly.
There *will* be auctions.
There will be losers.

And that is fine by me. At this point the BPHs deserve what they've got coming. They *made* this mess.

[ProfCrash]

Pottermoore has delivered squat so far. There are fewer beta testers then originally plan, it is massively behind schedule, and the e-books are still not available. Toss in the fact that it will be a rare exception to the rule for me to buy my books from an authors website. It is too much of a pain in the butt to go to a ton of different websites. I like the convenience of downloading all of my books from one place, that is one of the reasons I have a Kindle.

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by GlenBarrington

I don't think they are endangered, paper books are a great portable, low tech way to read, there will always be a market for them. I still prefer paper magazines and newspapers over their e-versions.

Agreed about the magazines.

I still actually like, and buy paper books because I like having books I can just pass around to the other family members and friends.

Also, even brand new, I find printed paperbacks to be actually priced accordingly and realistically for what I am getting, whereas e-books have a bunch of kinks to work out, pricewise and value-wise, title for title. (and its also legal to buy a used paper book at a yard sale for a quarter)

E-books, for me, while I love them fiercely, still have a long way to go before I will stamp out printed books from my life. Price has to go way way down, and the legality surrounding them has to change. And more e-book providers have to support Libraries.

[ucfgrad93]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

Pottermoore has delivered squat so far. There are fewer beta testers then originally plan, it is massively behind schedule, and the e-books are still not available. Toss in the fact that it will be a rare exception to the rule for me to buy my books from an authors website. It is too much of a pain in the butt to go to a ton of different websites. I like the convenience of downloading all of my books from one place, that is one of the reasons I have a Kindle.

This pretty much mirrors my thoughts as well.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

Pottermoore has delivered squat so far. There are fewer beta testers then originally plan, it is massively behind schedule, and the e-books are still not available.

Uh-huh.
Which is one reason the other name brands authors aren't jumping yet.
Once it is up and running, the word may get around about how hard it is to do and why. And what the risk-reward ratio is like. (And whether counting on Sony for a software-driven venture was wise.)

http://www.pcworld.com/article/23096...ottermore.html

And here's the curious part: the whole thing's been designed in partnership with Sony. This, despite EA's work on the standalone video game tie-ins, and Warner Bros' work on the films.

Sony's take: "Sony’s association with J.K. Rowling’s Pottermore brings together one of the world’s most innovative brands with the most successful book series in history, in a pioneering partnership that will help shape the future of story-telling," said Sony CEO and president Howard Stringer, adding "We are proud to be a part of it, both at this momentous announcement, and as we collaborate on its development over the coming years."

Keeping an eye on something is looking for lessons.
The first of which is definitely: "Don't preannounce."
(A typical Sony issue right there.)

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by morriss003

This is true, but I can't help noting that, since Amazon is also a middleman, a well known author might, at some point, offer up a manuscript for bid to the web company who will take the lowest cut. In the future, we might see Amazon, Google, Facebook and others having to bid for the right to be the middleman.

But it's not a matter of taking the lowest cut at all; it's also a matter of providing the widest distribution. If facebook offers you slightly more per book, but Amazon can sell 10x as many books, Amazon is who you're going to choose.

Which points out, again, that it's *hard* to do what Amazon does. Calling them a "middleman" doesn't make what Amazon does easy. And FB or Google *can't* do what Amazon does. They're not good enough and they don't have the right skills. I mean, look at Apple - a wildly successful company by most metrics but their e-book sales are being crushed by Amazon. Because Amazon is doing something really hard that other companies can't do.

I mean, as discussed upthread - look at the difficulty that Pottermore has had with its 7 books. (I know it does more, but still).

[ProfCrash]

The worst part, to me, is that there is no need for Pottermore to sell the books. They can easily be sold through the regular stores. JKR is intentionally trying to work around that and it is angering a lot of her fans. Not to mention increasing the piracy of her books as people get tired of waiting for the e-books.

[xg4bx]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

The worst part, to me, is that there is no need for Pottermore to sell the books. They can easily be sold through the regular stores. JKR is intentionally trying to work around that and it is angering a lot of her fans. Not to mention increasing the piracy of her books as people get tired of waiting for the e-books.

a darknet site i checked has had the harry potter books in retail quality since 2007. here we are in february 2012 and legal versions are still nowhere in sight. it seriously gets to the point where all one can ask is "are you bleeping kidding me?" i don't blame the people for pirating them.

[gweeks]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Really? How much profit do they make?

From information Baen and Baen authors have shared, both make more money from a single ebook purchase than from a mm paperback sale, but less than for a hardcover sale. The bundled purchases are about the same as a paperback sale.

You would have to go dig through the Baen bar for the posts to see the detailed information. Oh, the bundles went up $3 so the ratios might have changed too. I don't remember seeing anything on trade paperback either and I do notice Baen is doing more of them.

Baen is a smallish publisher, distributed by S&S, but not owned by them.

Greg