2 of 3 Judges appear to favor Apple in ebook appeal

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

As if anyone would read crap they don't think is very good, simply because the price is right. Funny how some can't conceive that people are actually finding new favorite authors among indies. But if it "fits the narrative" of a "race to the bottom" that some (with clearly more refined artistic sensibilties than the indie-buying plebes) insist is happening, then hey ... spin away.

Come on. *Great* literature can *only* be produced by traditional publishers. The rest is just vanity. Sheesh!

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Oh really? Nice opinion you have there. Keep telling yourself that all indies are generic books and that readers of indies don't care which author they read.

Not a whole lot of big name authors in the indie pool. I'm sure there are some that have a following, but Amazon has been very upfront in their attempt to commoditize the ebook market.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Not a whole lot of big name authors in the indie pool. I'm sure there are some that have a following, but Amazon has been very upfront in their attempt to commoditize the ebook market.

Have they? Or does Amazon simply not believe in bowing down to the traditional publisher and their idea of keeping ebook prices high to protect the precious hardcover editions?

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by rhadin

{Edited}

It would run big sales in hopes of gaining new loyal customers but the customers didn't stay; they only came for sales that were not sustainable.

I'm guilty of this. The only time I purchased books at BoB was during their 40% off sales. Looking at my receipts I see books normally $7.99 that I got for $1.58. Some were less than a dollar. Ah, good times.

Today, I always have a discount code when making a purchase from Kobo.

Since all my purchases are losses to the retailers, I guess I'm also contributing to their demise.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Please explain to me how you know with such certainty that Fictionwise's model was changed as a result of agency as opposed to another bad decision by B&N?

For all I know, and if you are honest, for all you know, B&N bought Fictionwise for the express purpose of putting it out of business and moving its customers to B&N. For a history of bad B&N decisions, need we look any further than the Nook? Why do you think that B&N would suddenly make a smart decision when it came to Fictionwise?

As I recall, when B&N bought Fictionwise you began proclaiming its death at the hands of B&N -- long before agency.

Fictionwise ran with it's business model even after B&N bought them. There was no change in the way Fictionwise did business until the day agency kicked in. So how can you say it was because B&N bought Fictionwise? It was agency that caused the change and the downfall.

[Demingy]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Not a whole lot of big name authors in the indie pool. I'm sure there are some that have a following, but Amazon has been very upfront in their attempt to commoditize the ebook market.

I've always been curious, what determines if an author is a "big name author"? I know there's the obvious few that just about everyone has heard of even if they don't read, but that seems to be a relatively short list based on the entire population.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Demingy

I've always been curious, what determines if an author is a "big name author"? I know there's the obvious few that just about everyone has heard of even if they don't read, but that seems to be a relatively short list based on the entire population.

I would say that the rule of thumb is an author who most of the book buying public knows and who generates significant sales based on their name recognition. One could also narrow it down to specific genres so someone like David Weber would be a big name author in the SF&F genre, even if his name recognition in the general public isn't up there like J.K. Rowling, for example.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Have they? Or does Amazon simply not believe in bowing down to the traditional publisher and their idea of keeping ebook prices high to protect the precious hardcover editions?

Hard to describe Kindle Unlimited as anything else. All you can read for $10 a month, mostly older books and indies. ebooks priced like a commodity.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Hard to describe Kindle Unlimited as anything else. All you can read for $10 a month, mostly older books and indies. ebooks priced like a commodity.

So that would mean that Oyster and Scribd (which came out BEFORE Kindle Unlimited, by the way) must also be trying to "commoditize the ebook market", right?

Shari

[DiapDealer]

Not to mention all the old Book Club buying models of yesteryear.
Commoditizing ba***rds.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Hard to describe Kindle Unlimited as anything else. All you can read for $10 a month, mostly older books and indies. ebooks priced like a commodity.

Ah, you were specifically referring to KU, not Amazon in general. Does KU threaten the traditional publishers any? And if it does, wasn't it mentioned that a business inflexible of change to the original business plan is doomed to fail? Since you strongly believe (my assumption on my part) that the traditional publishers won't go under no matter what Amazon does, we are all good here, right? Competition is a good thing.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Ah, you were specifically referring to KU, not Amazon in general. Does KU threaten the traditional publishers any? And if it does, wasn't it mentioned that a business inflexible of change to the original business plan is doomed to fail? Since you strongly believe (my assumption on my part) that the traditional publishers won't go under no matter what Amazon does, we are all good here, right? Competition is a good thing.

Yep, competition is a good thing. It will be interesting to see if that business model works or not. I don't have a problem with Amazon doing that. Experimentation is good. On the other hand, I don't consider the big Publishers evil for resisting that business model.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Yep, competition is a good thing. It will be interesting to see if that business model works or not. I don't have a problem with Amazon doing that. Experimentation is good. On the other hand, I don't consider the big Publishers evil for resisting that business model.

I didn't mean that the publishers should adopt and also create their own unlimited subscription model - but they do need to find ways to stay competitive if they want to compete for customers that KU appeals to.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

I didn't mean that the publishers should adopt and also create their own unlimited subscription model - but they do need to find ways to stay competitive if they want to compete for customers that KU appeals to.

I'm not sure that people that KU appeals to are really publisher's true customers anyway, any more than people who only read books they got from the library, or from the 2nd hand book dealers are. The publishers market to customers who buy new books. Of course, many people start at libraries and then move on to buy books, but there are many people who have never bought a book in their life and never will.

There is no doubt that publishers will need to continue to change and evolve. I've said before that I expect that we will see a resurgence of small niche publishers who are focused on specific niche markets and who provide value to authors with regards to editing and handling the business side of the book business.

As Tim O'Reilly wrote way back in 2002, when many artists were stressing over piracy, "Obscurity is a far greater threat to authors and creative artists than piracy."

http://www.openp2p.com/lpt/a/3015

(btw, it's a pretty interesting piece on piracy and online distribution written back in 2002. It's well worth reading. O'Reily runs an online computer ebook store that runs on a yearly/monthly subscription which was in place long before KI . I've subscribed to that store since around 2006. It's perfect for the problem of computer books that quickly become obsolete. You also get monthly download credits that allow you to download and keep ebooks. So, I'm not opposed to using a subscription service if it has books that I am interested in. I use netflix as well. )

Getting back to my point, the biggest issue that most authors face is obscurity. With the exception of a lucky few, I think that indie publishing makes it very difficult for an author to find enough of an audience to escape that fate. A good publisher helps to publicize an author. Go back and read Corriea's essay on why he likes his publisher (Baen books). To a great extent, that is what Baen's monthly bundles was started to do, get new authors in front of Baen's readership. (btw, this is why I think that niche publishers are on the way back. It allows authors of a specific genre to find readers of that genre).

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I'm not sure that people that KU appeals to are really publisher's true customers anyway, any more than people who only read books they got from the library, or from the 2nd hand book dealers are. The publishers market to customers who buy new books. Of course, many people start at libraries and then move on to buy books, but there are many people who have never bought a book in their life and never will.

Naturally, I cannot agree to this completely. KU appeals to different kind of readers for different reasons. Sure, the ones that can see themselves completely satisfied by it for their one and only source for books will never need look at a traditional publisher again. It is possible that a big part of KU subscribers fall into that category. There is, for sure, others (me included) that use it for the primary way to read books, but supplement with other channels including brand new pre-ordered publishers books. Libraries, while their patrons may not directly spend a dime, do purchase the books. Not sure if the loss of revenue from libraries would hurt the publishers or not, but without them it would be one step closer to obscurity.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

There is no doubt that publishers will need to continue to change and evolve.

Absolutely.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

As Tim O'Reilly wrote way back in 2002, when many artists were stressing over piracy, "Obscurity is a far greater threat to authors and creative artists than piracy."

http://www.openp2p.com/lpt/a/3015

Yes, I agree, that is a nice article way ahead of the time. Still mostly valid. To sum it up one only needs to read the last paragraph:

And that's the ultimate lesson. "Give the wookie what he wants!" as Han Solo said so memorably in the first Star Wars movie. Give it to him in as many ways as you can find, at a fair price, and let him choose which works best for him.

Now there will be difference in opinion what "fair price" constitutes, especially after seeing low prices for a while pre-conspiracy. One thing that the conspiracy did and can never undo again is the sudden rise of indies. Whether that was intended by the publishers or not does not really matter. Apple is probably indifferent about it - all they wanted is a way into the ebook store market. Without conspiracy I might not be able to enjoy Kindle Unlimited today. While for sure it is not for everybody, and even I supplement with library and purchased books, KU is a great service I would not want to be without. And only if it is for peace of mind to never run out of things to read without cutting into my budget. The article even predicts that (though in 2002 not yet for ebooks, but music) (bold mine):

Another lesson from television is that people prefer subscriptions to pay-per-view, except for very special events. What's more, they prefer subscriptions to larger collections of content, rather than single channels. So, people subscribe to "the movie package," "the sports package" and so on. The recording industry's "per song" trial balloons may work, but I predict that in the long term, an "all-you-can-eat" monthly subscription service (perhaps segmented by musical genre) will prevail in the marketplace.

Now back to your own words:

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Getting back to my point, the biggest issue that most authors face is obscurity. With the exception of a lucky few, I think that indie publishing makes it very difficult for an author to find enough of an audience to escape that fate. A good publisher helps to publicize an author. Go back and read Corriea's essay on why he likes his publisher (Baen books). To a great extent, that is what Baen's monthly bundles was started to do, get new authors in front of Baen's readership. (btw, this is why I think that niche publishers are on the way back. It allows authors of a specific genre to find readers of that genre).

I think you are on to something there. The big publishers need to reorganize - and not just have a multitude of small publisher grouped together. Whichever is in the Hachette group, in my mind, will stay together as one big mass. Same for the other big groups. Hard for me to distinguish between Hachette-kids, Hachette-romance, Hachette-sf/f, Hachette-fiction when you can still get mostly anything from Hachette.