"Is Government the Only Force Able to End Amazon Dominance?"

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

Ah, the short period of exclusivity explains why the government hasn't gone after them, I think. But I still say the multi-platform selling generates more sales than exclusivity.

Maybe not a lot more, but more-and does it cost the producer more? I suppose it could, in legal fees (and maybe administration) but not in 'production' costs. Or maybe it does-depends on whether we're talking author/publisher and who the contract holds responsible for the costs of re-formatting/converting the book to the new platform. But now we're getting into specific situations and those are always tricky because there's so many of them. Generically speaking I don't think it costs more to go multi-platform than exclusive so every additional sale is a plus.

Sorry, but going multi-platform does incur a visibility/support loss on Kindle.
And it is not always balanced out by sales on the alternates. It is not an absolute truth in the real world of indie publishing that putting a book on more platforms will result in higher net sales. Primarily because all the platforms are not equally good at promoting indie titles but also because the size and composition of the customer bases is different.

Remember, these are relatively low volume sellers that depend on the right person finding their book. That means their visibility depends strongly on the support the hosting vendor provides. Just look at the home page of the various ebookstores; some stores reserve top-level placement for BPH titles, usually on a co-op (I.e., paid) basis whereas Amazon top level placement is also-bot driven and treats indie titles the same as the BPH bestsellers. Look also to their search and sorting engines.

Amazon is simply better at matching customers with titles they might buy, regardless of provenance. (Of course, better doesn't mean perfect.)

As for why the feds don't object to Select exclusivity, the short commitment is a contributor. Also the fact that it is tied to the Prime lending library and other promotional tools so the deal offered is not one of exclusivity in exchange for access to the kindle marketplace but rather in exchange for a promotional boost within the marketplace. It is a partnership rather than a toll.
The kindle store is equally open to all books by all publishers (that comply with the TOS) but some books are slightly more equal. Which is perfectly legal.

Amazon has so far proven to have a good idea of how close they can get to the edge without stepping over the line.

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

Most Favored Nation clauses, AFAIK, act to lower prices, not to raise them. (i.e. the source must sell the product to its 'most favored' retailer at the lowest price that it sells the product to any other retailer). It's true that lowering prices can lead to market dominance-but how is that sort of dominance a bad thing? The 'evil' of monopolies is that they either stifle innovation or lead to higher prices. I can't see this doing either.

I mentioned MFN clauses because they may hinder competition. And competition usually lowers prices and encourages innovation.

Amazon in the past had to compete. Now there are only a couple of companies left that have the financial means to go head-to-head with Amazon. I'm guessing Google and Apple. Amazon doesn't have to work as hard although I think they will for now.

The next year or so will be interesting.

[charmian]

I don't think either Google or Apple will spend that much money on competing in books though. Google especially really hasn't made much of an effort recently, and isn't their market share especially negligible? And iBooks can only be read on Apple's platforms. Neither of them currently have affiliations with e-ink readers which represent a significant part of the market.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by charmian

Google especially really hasn't made much of an effort recently, and isn't their market share especially negligible?

I don't know about their market share, but I'm not sure they haven't made much of an effort. Many of Amazon's heavily discounted titles the past month or two have been price matches to Google sales.

[fjtorres]

Google's also been opening dedicated ebookstores all over.
Not sure how deep they might be given their penchant for going live with betaware but they're definitely trying.

[calvin-c]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Sorry, but going multi-platform does incur a visibility/support loss on Kindle.

Can you substantiate this? And does the visibility/support loss on Kindle lead to lower sales via Amazon? Very tricky to prove-in fact the only proven relationship between an ad for something & increased sales for it is when the ad offers a coupon. It has been proven that advertising, in general, improves sales, in general, so if you can prove that all (or even most) multi-platform books are advertised less on Amazon and match that with lower sales on Amazon then you might have something-but I don't think single book examples will do it.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

Can you substantiate this?

"Multi-platform" for ebooks has to mean ePub books with Adobe DRM support, and that would mean Amazon paying Adobe 22c per sale, just as every other ePub bookstore that uses Adobe DRM does. Hence a loss for Amazon, and also a loss for the customer, since the inevitable result would be higher prices, and the end of free books.

There's a very good reason why Amazon chose to own their own DRM platform, rather than paying fees to a third party, like Adobe.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

Can you substantiate this? And does the visibility/support loss on Kindle lead to lower sales via Amazon? Very tricky to prove-in fact the only proven relationship between an ad for something & increased sales for it is when the ad offers a coupon. It has been proven that advertising, in general, improves sales, in general, so if you can prove that all (or even most) multi-platform books are advertised less on Amazon and match that with lower sales on Amazon then you might have something-but I don't think single book examples will do it.

The evidence lies in the number of indie publishers going exclusive with Select and the squawking coming from Smashwords, among others.

The retailers don't publish data so all we have is anecdotal data from the author/publishers willing to talk. The fact that *any* such exist is proof enough that publishers going multiplatform does not guarantee more sales to *everybody*.

Believe it or not, as you will, but there are some 300,000 select titles at Kindle that come from authors that see no value in listing their titles elsewhere. With their livelihood at stake, I'm inclined to believe the ones that say their sales on other platforms aren't worth it, just as I'm inclined to believe the ones that report higher sales at Kobo or Nook. Every book and author is a separate case, really.

It is too early in the game for sweeping generalizations.

[BeccaPrice]

There's about to be 300,001 who have moved off Smashwords and back to Select. I made more in borrows than I have at all Smasnword's channels put together.

[calvin-c]

Originally Posted by HarryT

"Multi-platform" for ebooks has to mean ePub books with Adobe DRM support

No. It simply means the same book available from different vendors. The 'platform' came because Amazon offers books for the Kindle, B&N offers them for the Nook, etc. Sorry if the poor wording confused you. Multiple-outlet books might be a better description.

[calvin-c]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

It is too early in the game for sweeping generalizations.

Probably so. I don't accept anecdotal evidence and even more so I don't accept as evidence people who make decisions "because my neighbor says so". Mobs rarely make rational decisions. Not that authors necessarily constitute a mob but I've seen many who don't make rational decisions. Many refuse to publish their works DRM-free because 'everybody would steal them'. That's despite the evidence that it doesn't happen. So I simply don't believe that authors, as a mass, check the evidence before making marketing decisions.

[HaemishM]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Absolutely.
But how is it Amazon's fault that they've been blessed with inept opponents?

Oh it's not Amazon's fault. I honestly don't think it's even the other stores fault, like B&N or Smashwords. Amazon's dominance is because they've done most things absolutely right. The major publishers are really the ones that have done the most damage to the eBook market and helped create Amazon's dominance by short-sighted policies that do everything to protect their legacy business and not enough to develop the burgeoning eBook market.

The big pubs lost the plot. Restrictive DRM, price-fixing, focusing only on their best sellers and ignoring mid-list authors in their marketing has all contributed to the rise of Amazon and the proliferation of indie publishing as a viable alternative.

Originally Posted by calvin-c

Unless Amazon has contracts requiring they be the exclusive seller of books. If they start doing that then they could corner the market but AFAIK they don't. (Another caveat might be if Amazon were to cut their own throat by making Kindles incapable of displaying ebooks without DRM. That might lock people into Amazon but I seriously, seriously, doubt that will happen.)

Actually, for those authors who use Amazon's Kindle Desktop Publishing service, they ARE offering a Kindle-exclusive option, KDP Select. You cannot sell the book anywhere but Amazon for 90 days, and you must sell it for $2.99 or higher. In exchange, they give the author a few more promotional tools (like free promotion windows) as well as "library lending" which lets Amazon Prime members check out the book for free - the author gets paid out of a pool of money Amazon sets aside for the program each month so that even if the reader got it for free, the author still gets paid. Thankfully it is optional and I've decided against it. It's good business for Amazon but I don't want my non-Kindle readers to feel left out.

Amazon has actually done a good job with DRM. They allow the author to choose whether to put DRM on their books or not. I'm not saying Amazon is evil, just that I'm uncomfortable with one vendor having so much dominance. Not because I think they WILL use it for ill, but that they can.