Amazon vs Hachette

[Alfy]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Since you don't like the New York Times coverage, can you link to something on this in the Paris papers?

Actually, not really: I mostly read Le Monde, but their articles are behind a partial paywall. But I can tell you coverage is just as biased, but for a different reason. France is immensely suspicious of major US companies meddling with sacrosanct culture, whether it be Amazon, Google or Apple. Worst, Hachette USA is a subsidiary of Hachette France, which belongs to Lagardère, a very powerful private group AND a family with strong political connections.

For those still interested and who can read French or want to Google translate, here is a link, but you'll only see part of the article unless you pay. Particularly amusing is the link between this fight and recent revelations about working conditions in Amazon's logistics department, which makes totally sense and is not biased at all

http://lemonde.fr/technologies/artic...47_651865.html

Edit: I should add that in France, books cannot be discounted by more than 5% by law, in order to protect both the special status of books as cultural items and small book stores. The government recently voted another law, dubbed the "anti-Amazon law" in the medias, by which no reseller was allowed to offer free delivery on books if they already applied the discount. This was obviously directed at the Amazon Prime program. Just to say, I am not saying the French establishment is biased against Amazon just to fit my POV on this matter, there is strong evidence!

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by Alfy

New article in the NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/02/bu...ooks.html?_r=0

Apparently, Hachette is "fighting for its life"... The only half tidbit of interesting information concerns the negotiations themselves, which might allegedly be about discounts on ebooks. Nothing much, but the NYT is turning into a bona fide propaganda machine.

Well out of the four articles this is the one with the most journalistic integrity but that's not saying much. He does admit that:

Because Hachette and Amazon have signed confidentiality agreements as part of their negotiations, the particulars of their dispute have been kept secret.

But then goes on to say...

But inside the publishing world, the consensus is that Amazon wants to offer deep discounts on Hachette’s electronic books, and that the negotiations are not going well.

What you mean that the publishing world violated the confidentiality agreement and have been discussing the dispute within the coalition? Maybe there's a story there? Nah!

I especially like this one...

As part of Hachette’s antitrust settlement with the government, the company agreed to allow Amazon to continue to discount the price of e-books for two years. That agreement has expired, and for some reason — no one is sure why — Hachette is the first publisher to find itself in the position of negotiating a new one.

What? Is the court ruling and explanation blocked from the NY Times? Nobody knows??? ... or maybe the spin doctors Mr. Mahler has been getting his information from didn't want to tell him. The judge wanted to ensure that the publishers wouldn't illegally conspire again (the way the title of the article implies) and said they had to negotiate separate terms a year apart. The order was based on the same order that the publishers agreed to the settlement and Hachette settled first. Certainly the publishers know this because they filed a paper to the court contesting it and wanted to change the order.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/158900930/...-against-Apple

Mostly this is just a fluff piece about the Hachette CEO.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Alfy

New article in the NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/02/bu...ooks.html?_r=0

Apparently, Hachette is "fighting for its life"... The only half tidbit of interesting information concerns the negotiations themselves, which might allegedly be about discounts on ebooks. Nothing much, but the NYT is turning into a bona fide propaganda machine.

Yes, because everything you do not agree on is propaganda or?

I really do not get how people here can forget all the previous evidence about Amazon's bad behaviour. And the evidence we have now.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Barcey

What you mean that the publishing world violated the confidentiality agreement and have been discussing the dispute within the coalition? Maybe there's a story there? Nah!

Or it means that journalists are doing there job and getting information that is not public.

[Alfy]

Originally Posted by tompe

Yes, because everything you do not agree on is propaganda or?

I really do not get how people here can forget all the previous evidence about Amazon's bad behaviour. And the evidence we have now.

I would absolutely agree that Amazon has a history of being a very aggressive company. However, 3 articles and one opinion piece in one national newspaper in 7 days time, all completely one-sided, all ignoring any past "bad behavior" from publishing companies, glossing over their own strong-arm tactics and their awful business model, never making any attempt at showing the other side of the story, never once mentioning what publishers want when it comes to pricing of ebooks and where the consumers' interest might lie, yes, that's what I like to call propaganda, fully knowing I'm abusing the term for effect.

I am not a "fan" of Amazon, far from it. But the media outrage at what is happening now between Amazon and Hachette is just a bad joke. Being a subscriber, I'm expecting the NYT to be a newspaper, not a mouth piece for the BPH. Silly, isn't it?

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Alfy

I would absolutely agree that Amazon has a history of being a very aggressive company. However, 3 articles and one opinion piece in one national newspaper in 7 days time, all completely one-sided, all ignoring any past "bad behavior" from publishing companies, glossing over their own strong-arm tactics and their awful business model, never making any attempt at showing the other side of the story, never once mentioning what publishers want when it comes to pricing of ebooks and where the consumers' interest might lie, yes, that's what I like to call propaganda, fully knowing I'm abusing the term for effect.

I am not a "fan" of Amazon, far from it. But the media outrage at what is happening now between Amazon and Hachette is just a bad joke. Being a subscriber, I'm expecting the NYT to be a newspaper, not a mouth piece for the BPH. Silly, isn't it?

What awful business model? You mean the only one that up to now have worked in the sense that it produces high quality books?

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by tompe

What awful business model? You mean the only one that up to now have worked in the sense that it produces high quality books?

It also made it impossible for a lot of writers to make a living. I know of two favorites who had to stop writing and do other things because authors were and often are, last on the totem payment poll.

I'm not an Amazon gusher either, but I have to say that the articles have been rather one-sided. They are both big companies looking out for themselves. The articles do not reflect that.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

It also made it impossible for a lot of writers to make a living. I know of two favorites who had to stop writing and do other things because authors were and often are, last on the totem payment poll.

I'm not an Amazon gusher either, but I have to say that the articles have been rather one-sided. They are both big companies looking out for themselves. The articles do not reflect that.

Amazon is 10 times the size of Hatchette. So it is one big company and one smaller relatively seen. Of course Amazon will win the fight if they want since they have more money.

[tompe]

From a reader perspective good books that are affordable is my goal. My goal is not the cheapest possible reading materials. I want to have really good books. And Amazons commodity model of books will not give us the really god books that other models will give us.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by tompe

Amazon is 10 times the size of Hatchette. So it is one big company and one smaller relatively seen. Of course Amazon will win the fight if they want since they have more money.

That may be true, but the articles are still very one-sided.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

It also made it impossible for a lot of writers to make a living. I know of two favorites who had to stop writing and do other things because authors were and often are, last on the totem payment poll.

I'm not an Amazon gusher either, but I have to say that the articles have been rather one-sided. They are both big companies looking out for themselves. The articles do not reflect that.

The one-sidedness has actually been so absurd as to be amusing.

For "balance" try this one:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...mazon/9761817/

Amazon is still, eee-vile (a given, by now) but at least the picture of the BPHs more closely resembles historical reality instead of the la-la-land of the "guardians of culture".

Amazon, ever-more heavy-handed in its tactics, yet remains popular, if not beloved, among consumers — at least those who do not work in the book business — for its one-click efficiency and loss-leader prices.

The book business, on the other hand, is steeped in inefficiencies and illogic, with few fans among writers, whose books it generally fails to promote and sell, or readers, who, amid endless consolidation, long ago lost any sense of the meaning of once-vaunted publishing brands and imprints (it's hard to rally behind — say again? — Hachette books).

The book business has tried to rally a sentimental hurrah based on book culture and literary pride, as well as dire warnings of the loss of same. This is, however, a difficult case because the industry has not just consolidated into a beast of no cultural distinction at all, but has become an outlet for among the lowest and most ignorant cultural products — books, by and large, are silly and dumb, a cultural wasteland. The industry has largely been supported in recent years by Fifty Shades of Gray titles.

And yet it should not be forgotten that Amazon is exclusively in the business of leverage and power. It offers no more taste and sensibility — or pity — than Walmart. It merely seeks more power in what is now called, cheerfully, the product funnel.

So, broadly, the fight is between, on the one hand, the incompetents, craven panderers and mid-level corporate bureaucrats in the book business and, on the other, the authoritarian creepos at Amazon.

An equivalence theory of sorts: evil vs idiocy.

I do hope he doesn't drown the next time it rains.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by tompe

I really do not get how people here can forget all the previous evidence about Amazon's bad behaviour. And the evidence we have now.

I really do not get how hearsay and speculation that supports the "Amazon is evil" stance is considered evidence, while evidence of BPH's illegal acts and general ineptitude is considered hearsay and speculation.

[Fbone]

At least some people are buying among others Hachette titles from Walmart. Book sales up 70% last week.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/01/medi...azon-hachette/

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Fbone

At least some people are buying among others Hachette titles from Walmart. Book sales up 70% last week.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/01/medi...azon-hachette/

That is great.
As long as people get the books they want at good prices (say 40% off) all will be fine.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by Alfy

New article in the NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/02/bu...ooks.html?_r=0
--
Nothing much, but the NYT is turning into a bona fide propaganda machine.

In my opinion, it has been that way for many, many years.