2 Publishers Deny Claim of E-Book Price Fixing

[plib]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

What arguments?? What defense?? AGENCY PRICING MODEL is a defense? Hell, we're not even in the same book, let alone the same page. Are you telling me that you really believe the defense is going to come to the bar all prepared to defend the AGENCY PRICING MODEL while the DoJ is arguing collusion? I may not like them, but I don't think they're particularly stupid.

What I'm saying is simple. Neither the defense nor the DoJ, nor the judge gives two craps about the words AGENCY PRICING MODEL. They won't save or damn anyone in this case. The case won't be won or lost because of AGENCY PRICING MODEL. AGENCY PRICING MODEL will only become relevant again once this case is over. AGENCY PRICING MODEL has no bearing on this case. "Collusion" is the charge. "We didn't collude (and even if it turns out we did, we did it because we love puppies)" is the defense. Clear now?

There's more stone involved here than just tools.

(And arguing with it is just about as useful.)

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by stonetools

You really think that the huge slashes in ebook reader prices following on the introduction of the iPad would have occurred absent the coming of the iPad?

Kindle Pricing

• $399 - Nov 07 -- Kindle debuts
• $359 - Feb 09
• $299 - Jul 09
• $259 - Oct 09
• -------- Apr 10 -- iPad debuts
• $189 - Jun 10
• $139 - Aug 10 -- WiFi debuts
• $114 - Apr 11 -- WiFi w/ Special Offers debuts
• $ 99 - Jul 11
• $ 79 - Nov 11

Must've been that Doctor Who iPad that drove the prices down from $399 to $259. Time travel will do that, don't you know.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

What arguments?? What defense?? AGENCY PRICING MODEL is a defense? Hell, we're not even in the same book, let alone the same page. Are you telling me that you really believe the defense is going to come to the bar all prepared to defend the AGENCY PRICING MODEL while the DoJ is arguing collusion? I may not like them, but I don't think they're particularly stupid.

What I'm saying is simple. Neither the defense nor the DoJ, nor the judge gives two craps about the words AGENCY PRICING MODEL. They won't save or damn anyone in this case. The case won't be won or lost because of AGENCY PRICING MODEL. AGENCY PRICING MODEL will only become relevant again once this case is over. AGENCY PRICING MODEL has no bearing on this case. "Collusion" is the charge. "We didn't collude (and even if it turns out we did, we did it because we love puppies)" is the defense. Clear now?

Shouting that agency pricing is irrelevant to the case may provide you with emotional catharthis , but it doesn't really change things. I might add that all I am doing here is laying out the defense case, not whether or not the defenses will work.

You know who thinks that agency pricing is relevant? The DOJ. They spend a chunk of the complaint explaining what the agency pricing model is, why Apple and the publishers wanted it, and what role it played in their theory of the conspiracy. If you like you can address a letter in all caps to the chief litigator of the DOJ saying all of that was a waste of time. Here ya go,

John R. Read
Chief, Litigation III Section
United States Department of Justice
450 5th St NW
Suite 4000
Washington DC 20530

Glad to be of service.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Kindle Pricing

• $399 - Nov 07 -- Kindle debuts
• $359 - Feb 09
• $299 - Jul 09
• $259 - Oct 09
• -------- Apr 10 -- iPad debuts
• $189 - Jun 10
• $139 - Aug 10 -- WiFi debuts
• $114 - Apr 11 -- WiFi w/ Special Offers debuts
• $ 99 - Jul 11
• $ 79 - Nov 11

Must've been that Doctor Who iPad that drove the prices down from $399 to $259. Time travel will do that, don't you know.

Most business analysts appear to believe the iPad is at least responsible for the big drop that occurred within a few months of April 10. It took two years for the KIndle to go from 399 to 259, and indeed that drop was most likely prompted by news about the coming Nook.

Two months after the ipad, the Kindle price declined sharply and a WiFi model came out. Cioncidence? Doubt it.(Most biz analysts doubt it too).

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Kindle Pricing

• $399 - Nov 07 -- Kindle debuts
• $359 - Feb 09
• $299 - Jul 09
• $259 - Oct 09
• -------- Apr 10 -- iPad debuts
• $189 - Jun 10
• $139 - Aug 10 -- WiFi debuts
• $114 - Apr 11 -- WiFi w/ Special Offers debuts
• $ 99 - Jul 11
• $ 79 - Nov 11

Must've been that Doctor Who iPad that drove the prices down from $399 to $259. Time travel will do that, don't you know.

Who?



.

[kennyc]

Hey, I have a question, if the DOJ prevails and proves their case will the tools crawl back under the stone?

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Most business analysts appear to believe the iPad is at least responsible for the big drop that occurred within a few months of April 10. It took two years for the KIndle to go from 399 to 259, and indeed that drop was most likely prompted by news about the coming Nook.

Two months after the ipad, the Kindle price declined sharply and a WiFi model came out. Cioncidence? Doubt it.(Most biz analysts doubt it too).

You're forgetting Kobo. They popped onto the scene on 01 May 2010 at $149. I didn't have an ereader at that time and had previously considered the Nook until Kobo came along. That's when B&N dropped its price and Amazon immediately countered. The iPad had nothing to do with this.

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Most business analysts appear to believe the iPad is at least responsible for the big drop that occurred within a few months of April 10. It took two years for the KIndle to go from 399 to 259, and indeed that drop was most likely prompted by news about the coming Nook.

Two months after the ipad, the Kindle price declined sharply and a WiFi model came out. Cioncidence? Doubt it.(Most biz analysts doubt it too).

BREAKING NEWS: Competition drives down product price, news at 11.

Of course the publishers' response to competition appears to be to collude with one another to avoid competition altogether, so I understand why this might be confusing.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Shouting that agency pricing is irrelevant to the case may provide you with emotionnal catharthis ...

... If you like you can address a letter in all caps to the chief litigator of the DOJ saying all of that was a waste of time. Here ya go,

Dude, you're aware that the only "shouting" in my post were words that I copied and pasted from yours, right? That was sort of the whole point. I thought maybe they were some weird requirement of yours. You know... like how you use "THE INTERNET!!" all the time? But if you want to be all capital-word-hoggy and not let anybody else use them, that's cool. You can keep them. I'm not a big fan anyway. I just thought "When in Rome..."

Originally Posted by stonetools

What the DOJ is arguing is that Apple and the BPH 5 entered into conspiracy to raise prices-AND THAT THEY USED THE AGENCY MODEL- and the MFN clause-to enforce it. Clear now?

And I'll leave you with:
"Your Honor. If it will speed things along... the prosecution will concede that there's nothing inherently illegal about a manufacturer/producer wanting to control the retail price of their 'product'."

[Duze]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Most business analysts appear to believe the iPad is at least responsible for the big drop that occurred within a few months of April 10. It took two years for the KIndle to go from 399 to 259, and indeed that drop was most likely prompted by news about the coming Nook.

Two months after the ipad, the Kindle price declined sharply and a WiFi model came out. Cioncidence? Doubt it.(Most biz analysts doubt it too).

The problem is that even if Apple never got into the e-book market, just the ipad alone would have put pressure on the market to lower the price of readers.

The most likely reason that the prices dropped so much after the release of ipad is because of the introduction of more universal devices. E-ink devices now not only had to compete with small lcd devices like smartphones, but now also had to compete with large screen devices with decent battery life.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Hey, I have a question, if the DOJ prevails and proves their case will the tools crawl back under the stone?

I'll be happy to conclude that justice was done. If defense prevails,will you say the same?
And will you be a bit more civil?

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I'll be happy to conclude that justice was done. If defense prevails,will you say the same?

No offense, but I believe it when I see it. We will be on the edges of our seats looking out for you to post "justice was done" in capital letters in this forum.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

No offense, but I believe it when I see it. We will be on the edges of our seats looking out for you to post "justice was done" in capital letters in this forum.

Gawd knows I certainly will.

Oh but someone will have to quote him on it for me to see it.

[sabredog]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Gawd knows I certainly will.

Oh but someone will have to quote him on it for me to see it.

I haven't got that far as yet. I like to read about the publishers anachronistic business practices and views via such a direct conduit.

[stonetools]

Because There can NEVER be enough posting on everyone's favorite DOJ lawsuit, here's a Tim Carmody article. It predates the DOJ filing, but it discusses the legal and business issues in both the DOJ case and the lawsuit. Acording to Carmody, its bigger than ebooks or agency. LINK
money quote:

Pozen’s comments to the WSJ confirm what IP and antitrust experts have told Wired: this is much bigger than agency pricing alone.

“Plenty of business practices raise prices that aren’t antitrust violations,” says Donald Knebel, an IP and antitrust attorney affiliated with Indiana University’s Center for Intellectual Property Research. “Agency pricing is perfectly legal. But something isn’t an agency relationship just because you call it that.”

Knebel says there are three major points of law at stake in both the class-action suit and the Justice Department investigation against Apple and the five publishers:

1.Whether and how the agency model applies to virtual goods;
2.Whether Apple and publishers engaged in a “hub-and-spoke” conspiracy or simply “conscious parallelism”;
3.The status of the “most-favored nation” clause, common to many legal contracts today, which Apple used to ensure that books could not be sold elsewhere at a lower price than in the iBooks store.

RTWT.
Here's an interesting issue:

Of course, Apple also (implausibly, I would say) argues that it did not consider Amazon a threat to either its electronics or media sales business: “If Amazon was a ‘threat’ that needed to be squelched by means of an illegal conspiracy, why would Apple offer Amazon’s Kindle app on the iPad? … Why would Apple conclude that conspiring to force Amazon to no longer lose money on eBooks … would cripple Amazon’s competitive fortunes?” [emphasis added]

Even in a legal brief, Apple knows just how to smack Amazon around.

I tell you, this ain't a simple case, which is why its so intriguing.