Obligations & Trust

[Timboli]

Originally Posted by AnotherCat

I'm sorry but I am not going to engage with you in your so-called "philosophical" discussion as you have demonstrated completely a one sided attitude.

Then why are you here responding?

You conveniently forget, omit on purpose or perhaps regard as acceptable behaviours the very widespread customer practices which break the trust that businesses place in them, for example:

- Customer insurance claim fraud
- Customer warranty claim fraud
- Customer shoplifting (including payment for some goods but not others hidden during a shop)
- Customer indebtedness, including dishonoured instruments (cheques, cards, etc.)
- Customer exaggerated sense of entitlement (e.g. not recognising the rights of the seller, demanding supply not in the original purchase agreement, lying to gain advantage).

As others have said, it is in fact a two way street and most of us have no real problems with suppliers. So, as I said, I will leave you to your predetermined and unshakable "philosophy".

Where have I claimed or said any of that?

What is not said can be just as important as what is said, so don't put words in my mouth, that I never said ... or as far as you know, even thought.

There are always some bad eggs, but because of those bad eggs, many companies think they have a right to penalize the rest of us. I of course, don't agree. And the problem with such a Dog Eat Dog mentality, means you set up a perpetual Catch-22 condition.

Far better to trust that most people will do the right thing ... or maybe a misunderstanding has occurred, where integrity and honest concern might fix things.

[Timboli]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I only take issue with those who believe that if you are a victim (of the heinous crime of causing someone to be unsatisfied with a shopping experience), it can NEVER be your own fault.

If you want to be "equals" with sellers, then do so. Only give your business to those who do right by you.

I think you are over-simplifying there, as the world in reality, is much more complex than you try to make it seem.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Timboli

I think you are over-simplifying there, as the world in reality, is much more complex than you try to make it seem.

Because, of course, you couldn't possibly be guilty of needlessly complicating things.

[Timboli]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Because, of course, you couldn't possibly be guilty of needlessly complicating things.

Who knows? I am only human after all ... and that's my whole point.

[Pajamaman]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I only take issue with those who believe that if you are a victim (of the heinous crime of causing someone to be unsatisfied with a shopping experience), it can NEVER be your own fault.

If you want to be "equals" with sellers, then do so. Only give your business to those who do right by you.

This is hard to do in a mature market where the market is dominated by very few or even just one huge seller. If that seller chooses not "to do right by you" then there is practically no other business to give your business to. To my mind, this is a common case where the market breaks down.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by Pajamaman

This is hard to do in a mature market where the market is dominated by very few or even just one huge seller. If that seller chooses not "to do right by you" then there is practically no other business to give your business to. To my mind, this is a common case where the market breaks down.

Amazon continues to have competion in the case of the vast majority of books. But of course a buyer is I think left without an alternative supplier in the case of Amazon imprints, Amazon exclusive KDP books and of course Kindle Worlds books. At least in the case of the Amazon imprints, this seems to be due not to Amazon but to a boycott by the rest of the industry. In these circumstances it seems to be fairly safe to say that other retailers have not approached Amazon seeking to distribute KDP exclusive or Kindle Worlds books. If they did so I suspect that Amazon may well be prepared to license these books to them, if only to avoid any suggestion that anti-trust action is appropriate which would surely follow a refusal. Further, if any of these retailers then chose to discount these books, even to the point of making a loss on them, I suspect Amazon would simply sit back and happily accept the money rather than argue their books were being devalued.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Pajamaman

This is hard to do in a mature market where the market is dominated by very few or even just one huge seller. If that seller chooses not "to do right by you" then there is practically no other business to give your business to. To my mind, this is a common case where the market breaks down.

I simply don't buy your argument. No retailer is so huge that you're forced to buy from only them. I find plenty of sellers to give my business to. And I only give those businesses who've done right by me my repeat business. As far as books that are "Amazon exclusive"; that is entirely the fault of authors/rights-holders who agree to exclusive terms. Take it up with them.

I'm the equal partner of every retailer I do business with. We're square after every transaction. I don't owe them: they don't owe me.

[Pajamaman]

Originally Posted by darryl

At least in the case of the Amazon imprints, this seems to be due not to Amazon but to a boycott by the rest of the industry. In these circumstances it seems to be fairly safe to say that other retailers have not approached Amazon seeking to distribute KDP exclusive or Kindle Worlds books. If they did so I suspect that Amazon may well be prepared to license these books to them...

I'm not sure what you mean by Amazon Imprints. Are these print or electronic books?

More generally speaking, what makes you think Amazon want other sellers to sell their exclusive content? Is their evidence for this? It seems to me that Amazon has adopted an exclusive business model. Their Kindle platform with its associated in-house file formats is an example. Are secondary sellers allowed to sell Kindle ebooks? If this is the case, I am not aware of it.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I simply don't buy your argument. No retailer is so huge that you're forced to buy from only them. I find plenty of sellers to give my business to. And I only give those businesses who've done right by me my repeat business. As far as books that are "Amazon exclusive"; that is entirely the fault of authors/rights-holders who agree to exclusive terms. Take it up with them.

I'm the equal partner of every retailer I do business with. We're square after every transaction. I don't owe them: they don't owe me.

Agreeing completely.
Last time I looked, I could buy groceries at Walmart or any grocery store of my choice in the area. I once heard the argument that "I can't stand W, but I have to shop there because K is too expensive. "
But that is not W forcing her to shop there. Though she tried to say it was.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by darryl

Amazon continues to have competion in the case of the vast majority of books. But of course a buyer is I think left without an alternative supplier in the case of Amazon imprints, Amazon exclusive KDP books and of course Kindle Worlds books. At least in the case of the Amazon imprints, this seems to be due not to Amazon but to a boycott by the rest of the industry. In these circumstances it seems to be fairly safe to say that other retailers have not approached Amazon seeking to distribute KDP exclusive or Kindle Worlds books. If they did so I suspect that Amazon may well be prepared to license these books to them, if only to avoid any suggestion that anti-trust action is appropriate which would surely follow a refusal. Further, if any of these retailers then chose to discount these books, even to the point of making a loss on them, I suspect Amazon would simply sit back and happily accept the money rather than argue their books were being devalued.

Not just in books either. I was looking at a piece of exercise equipment to buy next month. Amazon had it listed at a good price, but then I noticed that it was "Amazon Prime only" which put me out in the cold. I can't afford to be incurring the expense of Amazon Prime just to get something useful at a cheap price. Being a man on a limited income I don't have the $ for it. Especially as I don't buy a lot of stuff usually anyway. So instead of Amazon I will likely buy the item from Wal-Mart's online store instead.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by Pajamaman

I'm not sure what you mean by Amazon Imprints. Are these print or electronic books?

Both.

Originally Posted by Pajamaman

More generally speaking, what makes you think Amazon want other sellers to sell their exclusive content? Is their evidence for this? It seems to me that Amazon has adopted an exclusive business model. Their Kindle platform with its associated in-house file formats is an example. Are secondary sellers allowed to sell Kindle ebooks? If this is the case, I am not aware of it.

Please try reading my post and understanding exactly what I said.

[Pajamaman]

I reread your post and I think I got it. I'll reiterate. You are suggesting that Amazon wants to cooperate with other sellers to sell it's products. I see know evidence of that. Do you?

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by Pajamaman

Are secondary sellers allowed to sell Kindle ebooks? If this is the case, I am not aware of it.

Many small indie pubs sell books directly on their websites in Kindle compatible formats as do somewhat larger pubs like Baen & O'Reilly.

Originally Posted by Pajamaman

I reread your post and I think I got it. I'll reiterate. You are suggesting that Amazon wants to cooperate with other sellers to sell it's products. I see know evidence of that. Do you?

Stores selling Kindle's, Echo's, Dot's, Fire's & Fire TV's. Also the fact that books published by Amazon Publishing can be purchased from places like Barnes & Noble (example). Or how about Amazon Studios shows being sold on iTunes & Vudu?

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by crich70

Not just in books either. I was looking at a piece of exercise equipment to buy next month. Amazon had it listed at a good price, but then I noticed that it was "Amazon Prime only" which put me out in the cold. I can't afford to be incurring the expense of Amazon Prime just to get something useful at a cheap price. Being a man on a limited income I don't have the $ for it. Especially as I don't buy a lot of stuff usually anyway. So instead of Amazon I will likely buy the item from Wal-Mart's online store instead.

Whispering 30 day free trial.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by Pajamaman

I reread your post and I think I got it. I'll reiterate. You are suggesting that Amazon wants to cooperate with other sellers to sell it's products. I see know evidence of that. Do you?

I'm not suggesting that Amazon wants to cooperate with other sellers. They may or may not. What I am suggesting is that if other sellers want to sell Amazon books Amazon may well agree. Not necessarily because they want to agree. But because anti-trust and similar competition laws may make this in Amazon's best interests. Particularly with its imprints. To see Amazon's imprints look at:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.ht...cId=1000664761(its own publishing companies).

Amazon may well like to see at least books from its imprints in B&N' and Independent bookstores, but they are subject to boycott. See, for example:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapt...boycott-Amazon

EDIT: AnemicOak's post above is very interesting as it shows a 47North (Amazon Imprint) book for sale on Barnes and Noble. Personally I haven't seen this before. Perhaps B&N have changed their attitude? Or perhaps this is a rare exception? Either way, it looks like Amazon has permitted it.