Amazon vs. Hachette Update - It's About Price

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Are you a gamer, perchance?

No.

Originally Posted by fjtorres

There are entire web sites dedicated to tracking and reporting on game sales because discounting is so prevalent, from launch day on.

Publishers could switch to the gimmicky pricing schemes you apparently prefer, and that disguise any price maintenance. I've mentioned before that complex price maintenance schemes, incorporating discounting, might be more popular with Mobileread posters. Independent books stores wouldn't like that, and I care about them a little. But I'm OK with Hachette moving to gimmick pricing, so long as it doesn't come about by one dominant retailer forcing all but a "small number of specialized titles" (Amazon's phrase) into the same pricing mold as quickly written fiction.

If $4.50, as you say, is what you pay, go indie.

How about if Amazon just lets Hachette price as it wish, and then competes against them with Amazon Publishing and Kindle Direct Publishing? If the alleged buggy whip maker dies, what's the problem, since you never liked them anyway?

[darryl]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Not the best example, because video games are commonly sold under minimum price arrangements:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...act_id=1532998

It's closer to the opposite of what you are saying: Few people here whine about price maintenance except for books (although I do read the occasional anti-Apple yowl).

This is called mobileread. If you want to hear whining about price maintenance (though with Agency pricing it was actually price increase, not maintenance) in other areas, please look in the appropriate places. Surely you can't seriously conclude that this practice is accepted in other areas because there are no complaints on a dedicated reading forum?

And Steve. No problem for me if the buggy whip maker(s) die(s). Amazon is right now competing in these areas. But that does not mean it should hand over the retail trade and allow the buggy whip makers to rape and pillage at will. I expect most authors will move to Amazon anyway as the buggy whip makers continue to provide such a poor deal to all but the most successful authors.

Finally, Amazon is not a monopoly at the moment. But it may well be one soon if it's only "competition" is the buggy whip makers, who don't want to compete but to conspire and complain.

And thankyou for the phrase buggy whip makers. I propose that henceforth users of this forum use this term abbreviated to BWM instead of BPH.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

No.



Publishers could switch to the gimmicky pricing schemes you apparently prefer, and that disguise any price maintenance. I've mentioned before that complex price maintenance schemes, incorporating discounting, might be more popular with Mobileread posters. Independent books stores wouldn't like that, and I care about them a little. But I'm OK with Hachette moving to gimmick pricing, so long as it doesn't come about by one dominant retailer forcing all but a "small number of specialized titles" (Amazon's phrase) into the same pricing mold as quickly written fiction.

If $4.50, as you say, is what you afford, go indie.

How about if Amazon just lets Hachette price as it wish, and then competes against them with Amazon Publishing and Kindle Direct Publishing? If the alleged buggy whip maker dies, what's the problem, since you never liked them anyway?

The gaming discounts are no gimmicks, they are very agile responses to market activity. If the game is poorly received, the price drops. If it is a success, the price stays high.

And the discounts come from the retailers as often as from the publishers.

And do *not* presume to know what I can or cannot afford. You do not know me nor do I care to be known by you.

That I can easily afford plenty of electronic toys and digital entertainment has no bearing on the ways I choose to spend my disposable income. I simply refuse to waste money supporting the self-defeating idiocy of a handful of fading oligarchs.

And if I read indie titles it is because they offer something of interest not because they are cheap and deliver higher margins to the authors. But it doesn't hurt that it does. Unlike the snotty Prestons out there, most of the indie authors I've met are smart and witty folks who respect their readers.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Basically, you want a centralized system of pricing (publishing world communism economy): The price shall be $9.99 or less unless you fill in triplicate these forms and receive special permission to sell your book for $10. And here I thought you were an advocate for the free market.

In a free market, I can set my pricing at whatever I want and either you buy or you don't buy. I don't need your permission to set my price nor do I need to give a reason/excuse.

On the one hand you oppose agency pricing imposed by the maker of the goods for sale, but on the other hand support agency pricing by the retailer of the goods. (The legal definition of agency pricing is simply that the seller of a product receives a fixed percentage of the sales price. It is not tied to a specific pricing structure, which means that price caps can be agency pricing as much as price minimums.)

After all, what is, when you get right down to it, the difference between Hachette saying I want my books sold for nothing less than $15 and Amazon saying I want your books sold for nothing more than $10 (excluding, of course, the $5 in cutoff price)?

Other than that you as a consumer would pay less with Amazon's cap, I see no difference between Hachette's agency pricing that Mobile Readers have consistently railed against and Amazon's agency pricing that the same Mobile Readers support -- that is, aside from one being proposed by the hated BPH and the other by the beloved best friend Amazon.

Oh. Em. Gee.

You're right, I'm sorry, we are all communists because we support Amazon. Now let me just reflexively shoot off my own head in disgust...

Um, no?

Amazon is not proposing to force the BWMs ( darryl) to do anything, they are merely offering a recommendation that Hachette come to a mutually-acceptable arrangement to start pricing ebooks at an advisory $9.99 cap

The BWMs are more than welcome to accept Amazon's other offer to continue the wholesale model of charging Amazon based on a $14.99 list price (dropping over time as TPB and MMPB enters the scene) and having Amazon discount it as they see fit. Hachette doesn't want to, so now we are seeing a magical concept called "negotiation", where oddly enough, both parties get to have opinions and they have to agree which one to use.

[eschwartz]

While I do of course enjoy senselessly arguing with one another while screaming insults back ad forth and the making up of "facts" by various peoples, none of whom can ever agree who is doing what, etc. etc. etc....

I get really annoyed when a senseless argument devolves to the point the only suitable response to someone is to requote the quote they quoted and ask them to reread it with their brain turned on. With that in mind, I propose a new policy around here: anyone who infringes with such a post does not get responded to, except with a warning -- something like this:

This post has been excommunicated by the MobileRead Reading Comprehension Police for having nothing to do with anything anyone said. Members of MobileReaders Against Reading Incomprehension should refrain from responding to this post, and any future posts by this member, until such posts get back in touch with reality.

To the poster:
Please reread the discussion you have responded to, and make sure to understand what is actually being said, this time around.

Signed,

MobileReaders Against Reading Incomprehension

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Will you concede that those are very big IFs?

1. What if, instead, Amazon's assessment is wrong? Or what if Amazon's assessment is correct but only for Amazon and not for the BPHs? Or what if the BPHs' assessment is, in fact, the correct assessment?

2. What if Amazon decides that it isn't in Amazon's best interest to let the BPH charge $5 higher for that research-oriented book? That is, using fjTorres' "excuse" rationale, Amazon decides Amazon's sales of the book would decline thus hurt Amazon's bottom line so that even if the BPH's excuse would otherwise be sufficient, Amazon won't accept it because it favors the BPH and not Amazon? The big IF here being Amazon's altruism, something not previously displayed or able to be relied upon.

Will you concede that none of us have enough real facts, as opposed to speculation, interpretation, and preference for one party or the other, to draw the conclusion that Amazon is the angel and Hachette the devil in this dispute?

Will you concede that none of us have enough real facts, as opposed to speculation, interpretation, and preference for one party or the other, to draw the conclusion that Hachette is the angel and Amazon the devil in this dispute?

...

Oh, wait. We have a pretty good indication that Hachette is the devil in this dispute. They are the ones who engaged in an officially-illegal price-fixing conspiracy, and thus have no credibility whatsoever.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Devalues as in setting a price point in the public's mind that is less than the publishers want to sell it at. You confuse the manufacturer's cost of an item with the value of an item. The two are not the same. Value is how much someone is willing to pay for an item. At the moment, ebook price is tied to the price point of whatever the price of the current dead tree book at a particular point in time.

It might help if you think of it this way. X number of people are willing to pay $17 for a book, for whatever reason. Y number of people aren't willing to pay that much, but they are willing to pay $8 for the book. Rather than come out at $8 and get 8* (X+Y), book publishers publish the paper back a year after the hard back, which gets them (17*X) + (8*Y). The actual price point has little to do with the manufacturing cost of a specific book.

You confuse the perceived value of a book with the perceived value of an ebook specifically.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

And do *not* presume to know what I can or cannot afford. You do not know me nor do I care to be known by you.

The word "afford," in #196, was not meant as a personal attack and has been changed to the word "pay."

[ApK]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Will you concede that those are very big IFs?

If by "big if" you mean critical to the thing being true, then yes. If by "big if" you mean "particularly unlikely" then no.
As eschwartz just said, we have the BPHs past behavior, along with Amazon's past success, and it's effect on the industry as evidence. It's not proof, I agree, but it's evidence, and it's part of why I'd bet on Amazon over Hachette.

Originally Posted by darryl

And thankyou for the phrase buggy whip makers.

You are welcome (link, link). Seems I really have to fight for my byline around here!

Originally Posted by eschwartz

You confuse the perceived value of a book with the perceived value of an ebook specifically.

I do think there is a concern for devaluing books in general by setting the expectations of fixed, low prices, but since both Amazon AND the BPHs are willing to do it, I don't think it relevant to this thread. Another thread perhaps.

Originally Posted by eschwartz

I get really annoyed when a senseless argument devolves to the point the only suitable response to someone is to requote the quote they quoted and ask them to reread it with their brain turned on. With that in mind, I propose a new policy around here: anyone who infringes with such a post does not get responded to, except with a warning -- something like this:

I'm not clear if this was aimed at me or not. If so, please explain.
If not, well, please explain anyway, 'cuz I don't understand.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by ApK

I'm not clear if this was aimed at me or not. If so, please explain.
If not, well, please explain anyway, 'cuz I don't understand.

You should know, you made sure to agree with me about the first case: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...09#post2887809

Also https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...58#post2889058

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by ApK

You are welcome (link, link). Seems I really have to fight for my byline around here!

...let me see if I can find more of your phrases that I can attribute to someone else

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

How about if Amazon just lets Hachette price as it wish, and then competes against them with Amazon Publishing and Kindle Direct Publishing? If the alleged buggy whip maker dies, what's the problem, since you never liked them anyway?

That doesn't always work. One author's books are not the same as another author's books. They are not always interchangeable. It won't work.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by darryl

No. It is a mistake to value EBooks by comparison with PBooks. I personally will probably never buy another PBook. In fact, I think the day is coming when most Print Books are printed on demand, particularly if print technology becomes cheaper. The print book analogy is all about trying to justify charging print book prices for EBooks. I find it hard to take your suggestion seriously that ebooks be priced by reference to "per unit price of a hardcover book, including printing and storage".

And finally, since you agree that it should be at the retailer's discretion to discount, logically you must oppose Agency Pricing, since this takes such a decision outside of the hands of the retailer and places it into the hands of the publisher.

Excuse me? Read again. I am saying that the ebook at its most expensive should be priced at the hardcover book MINUS the cost of printing and storing for that hardcover book. It is probably not costing a whole $5 to print a hardcover book, so the ebook is not quite reaching $9.99 at launch, but closer to about $11.50 when the hardcover is at $14.99.

And I was comparing features of an ebook which makes its value a certain point. It also makes sense that after a while when the paperback comes out, that the ebook automatically becomes cheaper since it is old. It is still 100% exactly the same, except it does not smell new any more (metaphorically speaking).

And, doh, of course I am against agency pricing. That is why I said suggested retail price. If it sells at that price (hardcover minus printing / storing), the publisher will make the exact same profit as the hardcover book per each unit. It is even better, as there is no risk - every ebook in stock that does not sell does not need to be pulped. Leftover pbooks have to be destroyed, since it is cheaper than trying to sell them. Otherwise you lose even more money on them.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Excuse me? Read again. I am saying that the ebook at its most expensive should be priced at the hardcover book MINUS the cost of printing and storing for that hardcover book. It is probably not costing a whole $5 to print a hardcover book, so the ebook is not quite reaching $9.99 at launch, but closer to about $11.50 when the hardcover is at $14.99.

You're excused. Thanks, but I'll decline your kind invitation to read again. The point I am trying to make is that imho it is ridiculous to price an ebook by reference to a pbook, even with adjustments. I am not planning to buy any pbooks, and the hardcover price or the MMPB price should have no relevance to me.

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

And I was comparing features of an ebook which makes its value a certain point. It also makes sense that after a while when the paperback comes out, that the ebook automatically becomes cheaper since it is old. It is still 100% exactly the same, except it does not smell new any more (metaphorically speaking).

And once again, I don't give a damn about a paperback or when it comes out. It should be irrelevant to e-book pricing. We have this wonderful newfangled thing called an ebook. It doesn't require printing. It doesn't require pulping unsold copies. It doesn't even require a BWM publisher. It is much easier to produce and to distribute.

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

And, doh, of course I am against agency pricing. That is why I said suggested retail price. If it sells at that price (hardcover minus printing / storing), the publisher will make the exact same profit as the hardcover book per each unit. It is even better, as there is no risk - every ebook in stock that does not sell does not need to be pulped. Leftover pbooks have to be destroyed, since it is cheaper than trying to sell them. Otherwise you lose even more money on them.

That is really great news! The BWM sell for the same price as a PBook (a totally different product) less some amount for printing and storage of that PBook, a likely ineffectice attempt to equate the two. It is certainly much better. For the BWM, who maintain a link between high-priced PBooks and EBooks. Isn't it time the warning flag bearers got out of the way and let the car live up to its potential?

And one final point. Amazon in its release said:

Keep in mind that books don't just compete against books. Books compete against mobile games, television, movies, Facebook, blogs, free news sites and more. If we want a healthy reading culture, we have to work hard to be sure books actually are competitive against these other media types, and a big part of that is working hard to make books less expensive.

This point seems to have been largely ignored, but it is nevertheless true. A market where the BWM imposes the same old business model and seeks to foster print books at the expense of ebooks does no favours to the cause of books in general.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

You confuse the perceived value of a book with the perceived value of an ebook specifically.

No, I don't. I am specifically talking about ebooks and when they come out at what price point. If the issue was the perceived value of hard back verse paper back, then publisher would come out with hard back and paper back at the same time. They don't. One year is roughly long enough where someone isn't going to wait a couple of months for the cheaper price. Jordan's widow was applying the same logic when she held off releasing the ebook versions of the last three volumes of the WOT series. If your logic were correct, then if someone releases a hard back book and the ebook at the same time and same price point, then no one would by the ebook, since the hard back has more "value". Yet, that is obviously not true.