WSJ: E-Book Sales Fall After New Amazon Contracts

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

What does this time line tell us about Fictionwise's future in an alternative America of unbridled eBook price competition?

The publishers weren't doing something to damage Fictionwise. Fictionwise was already a part -- a small part -- of Barnes & Noble, and was competing with its parent while, it's highly likely, losing it money from day one of acquisition.

There's nothing the publishers could have done to save Fictionwise in a low price war against Amazon and it's own parent, Barnes & Noble.

If you want to blame someone for the demise of Fictionwise, Barnes & Noble seems to me a more plausible punching bag than the publishers. See:

You are way off base here. True B&N owned Fictionwise. But Fictionwise was run as it's own business. FW had a business model that worked very well and had may customers. That business model was not able to be sustained once agency came into being. No more sales, no more discounts, no more buywise club. No more club credit.

There is something the publishers could have done to save FW. They could have dumped agency and gone back to the previous pricing and let FW go back to running thing the way it was before agency.

You cannot blame B&N for the demise of FW. There is nothing B&N could have done to get FW back to where it was. It was the BPHs that would have had to give in, dump agency, go back to the previous pricing and allow FW to go back to doing a good business.

If you can prove to me how B&N could have saved FW, feel free.

[Purple Lady]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You are way off base here. True B&N owned Fictionwise. But Fictionwise was run as it's own business. FW had a business model that worked very well and had may customers. That business model was not able to be sustained once agency came into being. No more sales, no more discounts, no more buywise club. No more club credit.

There is something the publishers could have done to save FW. They could have dumped agency and gone back to the previous pricing and let FW go back to running thing the way it was before agency.

You cannot blame B&N for the demise of FW. There is nothing B&N could have done to get FW back to where it was. It was the BPHs that would have had to give in, dump agency, go back to the previous pricing and allow FW to go back to doing a good business.

If you can prove to me how B&N could have saved FW, feel free.

There was one more thing the Publishers could have done - give them an agency contract! When the publishers went agency, it cancelled all existing contracts. The publishers took forever to negotiate new contracts with smaller sellers. For smaller sellers it was months without being able to sell a book by the big publishers. How long can a store last when it doesn't have what people want to buy?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Purple Lady

There was one more thing the Publishers could have done - give them an agency contract! When the publishers went agency, it cancelled all existing contracts. The publishers took forever to negotiate new contracts with smaller sellers. For smaller sellers it was months without being able to sell a book by the big publishers. How long can a store last when it doesn't have what people want to buy?

Thank you for mentioning that. I did forget about that. That's another reason why FW and BooksOnBoard failed.

The BPHs did kill off a lot of little shops with their agency conspiracy. And for that, they should never be allowed agency or any price higher than mass market.
.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But Fictionwise was run as it's own business.

That's not what the business development manager of Astek, who seemed to have inside knowledge, was writing on this board at the time:

They got purchased by Barnes and Noble and the lawyers and bean counters have ruined a good company.

You yourself, on June 15, 2010, noted that Fictionwise, in the Nook era, before Random House agency, failed to deeply discount Random House titles, even though, at that time, it could have:

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...9&postcount=17

And then, to the distress of at least one poster here, Fictionwise stopped selling magazine subscriptions:

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...9&postcount=28

The magazines mentioned on the June 2010 thread are all ones that come from this non-big-five periodical publishers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_Magazines

Originally Posted by Purple Lady

When the publishers went agency, it cancelled all existing contracts.

Could be. But I haven't come across evidence that such contracts existed. Do you have a cite on this?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

That's not what the business development manager of Astek, who seemed to have inside knowledge, was writing on this board at the time:

They got purchased by Barnes and Noble and the lawyers and bean counters have ruined a good company.

http://dearauthor.com/ebooks/retaile...ward-programs/

Retailers End Loyalty and Reward Programs

I’m not certain why but retailers are discontinuing all ebook loyalty and reward programs. Fictionwise put up a link (but did not make a front page announcement) that Buywise program has been discontinued.

The Fictionwise Buywise Club can no longer be renewed and new subscriptions are no longer available. All existing Buywise Club members may continue to use their benefits until their memberships expire.

– The Fictionwise Team

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

http://dearauthor.com/ebooks/retaile...ward-programs/

It doesn't get any clearer than the Kobo explanation:

KoboBooks pointed out that under this new Apple pricing scheme by publishers, loyalty programs, coupons and the like are not allowed:

We lose most of our ability to issue coupons, promotions, special discounts, kickbacks, buy-X-get-one-free. We could still do it for non-agency titles, but then we end up in a weird situation of "Get $1 off, but only on these books, and definitely not on these other ones." That's not fun. And worse, it's confusing to consumers. We're sad about that, obviously. Not just because they're a great way for us to drive sales, but because they help us focus attention on specific great books, reward our loyal customers, and celebrate the launch of new features, apps or services.

[ottdmk]

Interestingly enough, the "Get $1 off, but only on these books, and definitely not on these other ones." is exactly what Kobo's been doing for the past couple of years. (Although to be accurate, it's always x% off, not $x off.)

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Thank you for mentioning that. I did forget about that. That's another reason why FW and BooksOnBoard failed.

The BPHs did kill off a lot of little shops with their agency conspiracy. And for that, they should never be allowed agency or any price higher than mass market.
.

And absolutely they should never be accorded any sympathy for Amazon now having a high market share... that the BPHs themselves directly brought about.
I

[Purple Lady]

Originally Posted by ottdmk

Interestingly enough, the "Get $1 off, but only on these books, and definitely not on these other ones." is exactly what Kobo's been doing for the past couple of years. (Although to be accurate, it's always x% off, not $x off.)

Because they have no choice if they want to use coupons or discounts. Agency never went away in Canada as far as I know so no discounts allowed.