Why is it okay for Jobs, but not for Bezos?

[Pardoz]

Originally Posted by guyanonymous

Are books to be sold via iBooks only readable/buyable by those with an iTouch/iPhone/iPad?

There's no public information available yet. It does look like it will be using a proprietary DRM scheme, which means you'll probably need to rely on an Apple-provided client for reading, at least until somebody cracks the DRM.

[zerospinboson]

Originally Posted by Sydney's Mom

I understand not wanting Amazon to control the ebook market - how has that worked out for music and Apple? Why is it okay for Jobs but not for Bezos? Or is it that they saw what happened to music, and its cash cow the album sale, and they don't want the same thing to happen to the hardback?

Ipods make up a very sizeable percentage of the digital music player market, and could only play tracks sold through the ITMS. Basically, iTunes is a Very Important Store, which, until well after that pricing show-downshow-down, was the only serious store selling digital audio tracks in numbers worth mentioning. By 2006, they had sold at least 1 billion audio tracks, and while single tracks are definitely cheaper than books, this is still quite a bit.
Amazon doesn't say how many units they've sold (although they might have told MacMillan privately), but the market here is far smaller, so that they don't even have a quarter of the position Jobs had when he was strongarming the music industry. (Also, I imagine the publishers noticed it when Jobs did so, and wanted to prevent history from repeating itself.) While Amazon might have Kindle users similarly locked in, they can't really tout sales of millions of reading devices per month to show that their customer base is enormous and growing, so they lost.

[bwaldron]

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

Ipods make up a very sizeable percentage of the digital music player market, and could only play tracks sold through the ITMS. B

Not true at all. I have owned a number of iPods over the years without ever buying a single track from the iTunes store. They could always play mp3 files. True, prior to Amazon's store there was no competitor selling major-label mp3 files, but eMusic did well doing so in the indie arena -- and people could easily rip their own CDs.

[whitearrow]

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

Sure, Macmillan claims that they'll drop ebooks to $5.99, but they're not doing it now. For example, a popular author like Sue Grafton has a number of backlist MMPB books with a retail price of $7.99, but the ebooks are sold at $14 and up. Over at Fictionwise, BOB, etc. there are plenty of ebooks that didn't drop in price to match the MMPB (especially books by MacMillan and its subsidiaries).

This is exactly my concern. If I choose to pay $15.99 to get an ebook day and date with the hardcover, I can live with that decision. But I should never have to pay more than the paperback edition, once it comes out, for an ebook edition -- that's absurd.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Solicitous

When I see new books discounted 6 months after release it is usually to do with bookshops clearing out stock that isn't moving as fast as it did when first released....

I know what you mean, but when I say that "publishers already use dynamic pricing," but I'm not referring to discounts or remainders -- though those do perform the same basic function. I'm referring to hardcover vs paperback.

It may seem that you pay more for the hardcover because it is a higher-quality product than paperback; the reality is that it's window-dressing on demand-based pricing. AFAIK hardcovers do not cost twice or three times as much to manufacture and distribute as paperbacks, and this is why they are "high margin" sales. You're paying more for the hardcover because when the book first comes out, demand is at its peak, and the industry as a whole knows they can charge more for it as a result.

[stustaff]

Originally Posted by whitearrow

This is exactly my concern. If I choose to pay $15.99 to get an ebook day and date with the hardcover, I can live with that decision. But I should never have to pay more than the paperback edition, once it comes out, for an ebook edition -- that's absurd.

why is it absurd? an electronic version can be backed up so never lost, read by(depending on DRM) multiple people at once. MUCH smaller .

And it isnt an issue that gets brought up with Music!

Paolo Nuitini - Sunny side up = £5.99 with free postage from play.com
Same CD from iTunes... = £7.99

it is a top seller via both retailers.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by basschick

ebook sales aren't cannibalizing hardback sales from me, nor from anyone i know....

While I have no doubts about the veracity of your claim, the fact is that anecdotes like these may be emotionally persuasive but they are statistically insignificant.

For example: I do not eat Twinkies, and I haven't seen anyone eat a Twinkie in years. Even though 100% of my sample population eschews Twinkies, I still cannot draw the valid inference that "because no one I know eats Twinkies, no one eats Twinkies," yes? My sample is either not representative and/or too small.

Again, while I am not asserting a specific amount, I think it's pretty clear that if you already have a Kindle, and you have a choice between a hardcover at $15.95 + $5.95 S&H, or the ebook instantly delivered for $9.99, you're almost certainly going to pick up the ebook.

[mcl]

Originally Posted by stustaff

why is it absurd? an electronic version can be backed up so never lost, read by(depending on DRM) multiple people at once. MUCH smaller .

And it isnt an issue that gets brought up with Music!

Paolo Nuitini - Sunny side up = £5.99 with free postage from play.com
Same CD from iTunes... = £7.99

it is a top seller via both retailers.

It's absurd because:

1) You do not own the file: you own a license to read the content, nothing more.
2) You do not retain Right of First Sale with the file, and therefore cannot resell it
3) The file cannibalizes the secondary market, meaning more money in the publisher's pocket
4) The file cannot be lent without breaking the law (DMCA)
5) The file is not a hardcover book
6) The file should not cost more than the current incarnation of the format (TPB or MMPB), because the file is not a hardcover book
7) The file incurs no return costs for the publisher
8) The file typically undergoes much less scrutiny than the physical objects, resulting in more typos, formatting errors, etc.
9) the file can be accidentally deleted; ever accidentally destroy a book? How often? How often have you accidentally deleted a file?
10) the file contains none of the cover art, or cover material of the physical object typically.
11) typically, the file does not contain the color plates and other graphics associated with the physical object. When it does, they are of a poor quality (not attributable to the display device; the actual graphics are low-quality)
120 The file typically cannot be used on multiple devices if DRM is present (common, and usually at the insistence of the publisher, not the e-reader manufacturer)

[Daithi]

Some more anecdotal evidence -- I buy more books now than I did prior to owning an ereader, and so do ALL my friends that have ereaders.

Now that I have an ereader, I'm actually spending more money on books that I had prior to owning the ereader.

[stustaff]

Originally Posted by mcl

It's absurd because:

1) You do not own the file: you own a license to read the content, nothing more.
2) You do not retain Right of First Sale with the file, and therefore cannot resell it
3) The file cannibalizes the secondary market, meaning more money in the publisher's pocket
4) The file cannot be lent without breaking the law (DMCA)
5) The file is not a hardcover book
6) The file should not cost more than the current incarnation of the format (TPB or MMPB), because the file is not a hardcover book
7) The file incurs no return costs for the publisher
8) The file typically undergoes much less scrutiny than the physical objects, resulting in more typos, formatting errors, etc.
9) the file can be accidentally deleted; ever accidentally destroy a book? How often? How often have you accidentally deleted a file?
10) the file contains none of the cover art, or cover material of the physical object typically.
11) typically, the file does not contain the color plates and other graphics associated with the physical object. When it does, they are of a poor quality (not attributable to the display device; the actual graphics are low-quality)
120 The file typically cannot be used on multiple devices if DRM is present (common, and usually at the insistence of the publisher, not the e-reader manufacturer)

1. Its a book I ONLY want to read it.
2. Does not apply in UK
3. and therefore more money to author. Good
4. Yes it can I can A, lend my device with file on or B, epub with adobe DRM allows me to put it on up to 5 devices
5. Good point, its lighter and smaller so better for me and all of us(we are on mobileread for a reason)
6. Same as above, cost of an item is not 100% based on production cost it is at least partly based on what the market will pay.
7. Both formats incur costs.
8. never had a major issue with any of mine.
9. Never I have a very robust back up system using time machine and most are available to re-download from retailer. I have Lost books before.
10. Im interested in the book not the cover.
11. see number 10
12. Adobe DRM Ebooks can. My Sony PRS300, parents coolER reader to name just two.

So im not saying some of your points arent valid but tehre are a lot of assumptions there all we are doing is listing differences between the 2 formats and proving taht they are two different things.

I dont believe an Ebook should automatically be cheaper! they are MORE valuable to me than Paper so what I am prepared to pay reflects that.

Ebook list

1. Cant lose it
2. Lighter
3. Never wear out
4. can read new release with family on our 5 devices at same time
5. change text size, small for me. Very large for elderly relative
6. remembers last read page(most do this)

So as i said have shown the Ebook limitations you listed are pretty easy to get around or dont impact on the actual reading of the book.

You will find it very hard(Impossible?) to get around the advantages of an ebook that I listed.

therefore the Ebopok is MORE valuable, at least to me

[Hellmark]

When Apple started setting the prices, they had a bit more control. iPods had been selling for 2 years at that point, and had a large chunk of the market. Jobs was able to come in and say, "Hey, millions are buying this music player, and they can only rip and pirate, so why not sell them music cheaply so they become legal?". Also, the price structure for music is still similar. 99 cents a song, ends up being around the same price for an entire album. Amazon did not have that leverage, and they have to deal with hard cover pricing, which the music industry never really had any analog to.

[mcl]

Originally Posted by stustaff

1. Its a book I ONLY want to read it.
2. Does not apply in UK
3. and therefore more money to author. Good
4. Yes it can I can A, lend my device with file on or B, epub with adobe DRM allows me to put it on up to 5 devices
5. Good point, its lighter and smaller so better for me and all of us(we are on mobileread for a reason)
6. Same as above, cost of an item is not 100% based on production cost it is at least partly based on what the market will pay.
7. Both formats incur costs.
8. never had a major issue with any of mine.
9. Never I have a very robust back up system using time machine and most are available to re-download from retailer. I have Lost books before.
10. Im interested in the book not the cover.
11. see number 10
12. Adobe DRM Ebooks can. My Sony PRS300, parents coolER reader to name just two.

So im not saying some of your points arent valid but tehre are a lot of assumptions there all we are doing is listing differences between the 2 formats and proving taht they are two different things.

I dont believe an Ebook should automatically be cheaper! they are MORE valuable to me than Paper so what I am prepared to pay reflects that.

Ebook list

1. Cant lose it
2. Lighter
3. Never wear out
4. can read new release with family on our 5 devices at same time
5. change text size, small for me. Very large for elderly relative
6. remembers last read page(most do this)

So as i said have shown the Ebook limitations you listed are pretty easy to get around or dont impact on the actual reading of the book.

You will find it very hard(Impossible?) to get around the advantages of an ebook that I listed.

therefore the Ebopok is MORE valuable, at least to me

Tell you what, then: You go right ahead and pay $25-30 per ebook. The rest of us will continue to sit over here and alternately chuckle at you under our breath, or shake our heads.

[guyanonymous]

Do we need different versions then?

a) Regular: Just the book itself - the content. Cost: Cheap.
b) Deluxe: The book, plus links, plus x, plus y, with a gold-embossed certificate of ownership. Cost: Expensive.

[stustaff]

Originally Posted by mcl

Tell you what, then: You go right ahead and pay $25-30 per ebook. The rest of us will continue to sit over here and alternately chuckle at you under our breath, or shake our heads.

So your laughing at me because because my $15 at most ebook is able to be read by my dad whose vision means he struggles with hardbacks. Because I can carry lots of them on my device, and because my family can all read the new release at the same time?

All of that is worth $15 to me!(is that even actually more expensive than a brand new HB in the US?). Now of course it would be even better if I could get it cheaper, but if it is going to cost $15 then for me it seems reasonable.

I'm sorry I don't get the joke and why everyone is chuckling at me, could you explain.?

[kilron]

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

Ipods make up a very sizeable percentage of the digital music player market, and could only play tracks sold through the ITMS. Basically, iTunes is a Very Important Store, which, until well after that pricing show-downshow-down, was the only serious store selling digital audio tracks in numbers worth mentioning. By 2006, they had sold at least 1 billion audio tracks, and while single tracks are definitely cheaper than books, this is still quite a bit.
Amazon doesn't say how many units they've sold (although they might have told MacMillan privately), but the market here is far smaller, so that they don't even have a quarter of the position Jobs had when he was strongarming the music industry. (Also, I imagine the publishers noticed it when Jobs did so, and wanted to prevent history from repeating itself.) While Amazon might have Kindle users similarly locked in, they can't really tout sales of millions of reading devices per month to show that their customer base is enormous and growing, so they lost.

i don't know if that analogy works. there's so many differences, probably more than there are similarities...

first off, as was already stated by someone else, iTunes and iPods can play many music formats including MP3. the iTunes standard music format is not a proprietary format, its AAC which is basically an audio-only MPEG4 file so you get a higher quality audio file at the same bit-rate when compared to MP3 for example. many devices besides iTunes can play AAC files and you can have an iPod and have tons of legally owned music that was never purchased on the iTunes music store. Steve Jobs was always a proponent of removing DRM and when he finally convinced the entire music industry that this was a good thing to remove DRM from all of iTunes music files, that was a very good thing and it ensures that files purchased there can be played on many other devices besides iPods alone as well as they can be easily converted into other formats.

the kindle is very different in this way in that it does not read many different formats of eBooks and doesn't even read the MP3 version of eBooks, that being ePub. are there any other readers that don't read ePub formatted eBooks? that and you can only read kindle books on kindle readers and kindle software. amazon is of course doing this on purpose and bezos' intentions are obviously very different from steve jobs' when it comes to drm like this.

the number being floated around is that amazon has sold around 3 million kindles, which is a lot, though its really all relative. apples sells millions of ipods each quarter and i think the most recent estimates are that apple has sold more than 160 million ipods to date (although i could be way low on this figure too).

iPods are also much much cheaper than eBook readers and amazon has never dominated the ebook reader market like apple has dominated the mp3 player market for years. so you are correct that amazon doesn't have the pull over eBooks that apple has over music.

again, i think we're all a little too close to everything that is going on and the truth is we don't know exactly how its going to shake out. i really think a wait and see approach is best before sounding too much like chicken little.