Kindlers Boycott $10+ ebooks

[cmwilson]

Something to keep in mind is that Amazon takes 65% of the retail price of each Kindle book. If a book is $9.99, Amazon gets $6.50 (less any discount they offer) and the publisher gets $3.50. The publisher still has to pay the author royalties out of that. Also, some publishers are still fearful that a low-priced ebook may "steal" some of their paperback sales, so they want to make at least as much on the ebook as on a paperback.

My guess is that Amazon is trying to make back what they invested in producing the Kindle, setting up the Kindle store, providing whispernet, and all the associated costs involved in launching a new device.

I agree that an e-book you can't sell, share, or give away has less value to the consumer than a paper copy. Maybe when Amazon has made up some of their costs, they'll give the publishers a better deal, so that the publishers can give the consumer a better deal.

An an author/publisher, I can afford to offer my books for $9.99 (and the first book of a trilogy for 99 cents--or free from my website), which helps level the playing field a bit between the big fish and the small fry.

Catherine M. Wilson
http://www.whenwomenwerewarriors.com/
http://www.catherine-m-wilson.com/

[nascarrunner71]

I tried to participate in a discussion on the Amazon forums about this. There's no talking to them. One person said, instead of buying the kindle edition for more than $9.99, she would buy the used paperback from Amazon--that would teach 'em.

I then explained that I was selling some used books on Amazon and the commission was $3 per book. If I charged $4, I made a buck. You're not "sticking it to the man." Amazon is making money for nothing on the used books--probably as much or more than the kindle books! They don't care--they won't listen to logic.

I won't pay more than I would pay for a paperback. I'm saving money in the long run, because I'm reading more "hardcovers" than I would have. Between the free books and the Stephen King books for $7.99, I'm ahead of the game.

[Wetdogeared]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

Well, best sellers cost less, because they are best sellers. They sell more. Of course, if the loose money on each best seller, they make it up in volume...

BOb

Originally Posted by cmwilson

Something to keep in mind is that Amazon takes 65% of the retail price of each Kindle book. If a book is $9.99, Amazon gets $6.50 (less any discount they offer) and the publisher gets $3.50...

If cmwilson is correct BOb, then Amazon doesn't really lose money on each sale of a best seller, they just don't make as much money per sale. I'm assuming by what you state is that the profit margin evens out in the end, after the volume of ebooks sold is taken into account.

From cmwilson's statement, it sounds as if Amazon *is* squeezing the publishers for lower prices, they get their 65% whatever the price is.

cmsilson did not disclose what amount/percent the authors royalties were who are not author/publishers like herself.

WDE.

[AprilHare]

I believe this should be expanded to all e-books, not just Kindle e-books.
The cost of e-book distribution is next to nil anyhow; gouging us for more than $10 USD is just not right.

[sirbruce]

The 65% is for using Amazon's special service to publish your book on Kindle. You can bet it's *not* the deal Amazon makes with big name publishers. It's something of an open secret that Amazon makes very little on the $9.99 price for bestsellers; they're keeping prices low to inflate demand. The don't make much on the Kindle either.

[rhari79]

No offences meant..Just a friendly banter on my opinions..

I hate DRMs and jailing. I hate animals in the zoo..and I hate having pets.
I love to see the animals roam free of their leashes and hence the doves roaming in courtyards..free. Biologically humans are animals too(many forget). I hate to think I am leashed to a cord by..maybe a dinosaur? I want to be free..I want my device to be free of encumbrances.

And for this reason I also boycott the Zune and some others. I can thrive very well with more open-minded providers.

Heard the Kindle is a good solid device, but a full jail-bird.
Even though I have had many chances to get the Kindle, if there is any such thing, I will vote for boycotting the Kindle itself. Why half-measures?

If I want to use a kindle, I want to read not only Amazon souped books, but also books from elsewhere. If the reading is problematic, that my problem Amazon need not care. Why restrict? And the whole point of selling an ebook reader is to support cheaper reading. So why should ebooks cost equal or more than paperbooks? Absurd..

No one will feel a thing if a farthing that is me proclaims to boycott. But join hands and the mass will make the matter weightier.
And Hence I boycott the Kindle and recommend my near and dears and so on to do so.

[grisjuan]

Do you all think this thread has been more contentious than you thought it would be when you started reading? There's something about this boycott that gets people on both sides riled up.

[rhari79]

Come to think of it, people become contentious about things they care. If the thing isnt worth the care, then no one will give a damn.
Hence, its an effort to make the Kindle better.
Making small changes to satisfy those that arent is only going to make the device better.
If the changes are made, all for good

There will never be a perfect device; but saying that and not attempting to approach perfection means the death of evolution and start of extinction...

whew..that was heavy..:

[dirtylc]

You have got to love mobileread. Really, do any mobileread members know anything about this boycott?! I have attempted to relay the information on numerous occasions. Truth be told when the consumerist.com ran a piece and I contacted mobileread, I was ignored. When TIME magazine, that's right TIME magazine ran a piece on, how ridiculous Kindle e-book pricing has become, the folks at mobileread ignored the story. Now they finally decided to run a piece. wow. I am speechless. Desert grandma I won't even bother arguing with you, I am sure you feel likewise. Sirbruce I suggest you look a little deeper then tossing out half-truths, Amazon makes profit. period. Check their 4th quarter earnings for 2009 during the worst economy in 50 years. Give me a break!!!!!

Mobileread read your own forums will ya:

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38348

[pilotbob]

I don't know what you mean by "MR ignored it". If you posted the information you posted it. I recall this being discussed quite a while ago.

What do you expect MR to do? I am confused.

BOb

[bhartman36]

The economics of this seem pretty simple to me. To whit:

1) Amazon is not running a lending library. They run a business.
2) They've sold ~ 500,000 Kindles, from what I've been able to research so far.
3) They have a long way to go before most people are sold on the Kindle (or other e-book readers, for that matter).
4) Amazon can afford to take a loss on e-books, because the only real cost they incur (per sale) is from Whispernet. It's not as if they (or the publishers) have to keep producing them. As long as one copy stays on a server somewhere, users can download that copy. (Obviously, they need more than one server, but they shouldn't need more than one file copy per server.)
5) People are free to buy or not buy Amazon's ebooks, as they please. But if you paid $360 for a Kindle, I don't understand why you'd want to turn it into a paperweight. What do you think'll happen if Amazon doesn't think they can make decent money on e-books? (See #1)

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

I don't know what you mean by "MR ignored it". If you posted the information you posted it. I recall this being discussed quite a while ago.

What do you expect MR to do? I am confused.

BOb

Bob, he's complaining becuase I moved this thread to the front page.I did so because the original post was well written and the thread was fairly active.


@dirtylc
Do you want to know why I did not act upon your previous thread? It did not interest me, and among the staff I was your best bet for advocating your cause. Here is why I wasn't interested:

Your post was thinly written, and did not have any links to more info. It advocated a Kindle specific boycott on an issue that affects all formats. Had you called for other device owners to join the boycott, you probably would gotten more attention here. Furthermore, you were rather trollish in that thread.

And frankly, I would rather work on getting publishers to go DRM free. I don't buy ebooks that cost more than $8, so I am (inadvertently) participating in your boycott.

[cmwilson]

Originally Posted by Wetdogeared

From cmwilson's statement, it sounds as if Amazon *is* squeezing the publishers for lower prices, they get their 65% whatever the price is.

Amazon gets 65% of the retail price (set by the publisher) less whatever discount Amazon applies to the book. For instance, I set the retail price of Books II and III of my trilogy at $9.99, and Amazon is currently discounting them at $7.99. That $2 comes out of their 65%. I still get my $3.50. (Which is less than I make on a paperback sale.) Amazon gets $4.50.

Originally Posted by Wetdogeared

cmsilson did not disclose what amount/percent the authors royalties were who are not author/publishers like herself.

An author's royalties depend on what the author can negotiate with his/her publisher. Typically, after earning out the advance, the author gets 8-12% of the "net," which is cover price less costs, typically half the cover price of the book for a dead tree book. I don't know what the current royalty rate is for ebooks, but I doubt most authors are willing to take less for an ebook sale than a paperback sale.

Since I am both the author and the publisher, I get to keep the whole $3.50 (my 35%), but of course I also have to pay the full cost of publication.

Catherine M. Wilson
http://www.whenwomenwerewarriors.com/
http://www.catherine-m-wilson.com/

[=X=]

I think the boycott is a great idea, my problem is their targeting the wrong company. They should be targeting the publishers.

Somebody here posted that Amazon takes 65% of the sales. Yet amazon also tends to price their eBooks down 40% from the suggested retail price. That means on the average book they are only taking in 25% profit. It think that is very generous It's the greedy publishers that have inflated the price of a eBooks.

Originally Posted by thibaulthalpern

I wouldn't call it a boycott though. This is totally mis-appropriating a term that is political and socially critical in nature and applying it to a practice that is not actually thought out that politically or critically. We shouldn't call it boycott when the act is merely the same as visiting a grocery story and seeing a jar of jam is too expensive for our budgets so we leave the jar of jam on the shelf instead of buying it. That's not boycotting.

Here is the def of a boycott (link)
1. to combine in abstaining from, or preventing dealings with, as a means of intimidation or coercion: to boycott a store.
2. to abstain from buying or using: to boycott foreign products.

Originally Posted by dealjunkie

While I personally think the boycott is a bit silly, I believe it's more complicated than a quick 'just don't buy it'. The fact is that a lot of users would buy the book if the price was low, giving publishers extra money they were never going to get in the first place. Ebooks give publishers far more flexibility to experiment with pricing models, but that experimentation hasn't happened yet.

If nothing else, this boycott raises an issue that is yet to be resolved, and I like it only for the fact that it might force a much needed discussion in the publisher-retailer circle.

Good points, but I disagree with you here. If a person outright decides not to buy an eBook because it's too expensive then the publishers think that eBooks are not selling well and there is no customer intereste. However if the community puts in an organized boycott then the publisher/bookstore knows it is being punished and can deciced to take corrective action, knowing that there is interest.

On the pricing experiment. I don't see it happening. The publishers are very greedy here. What I've seen recently is quite the opposite of your opinion. Publishers across the board have repriced eBooks to cost as much or only slightly less that their most expensive books. For example Simon and Schuster had great eBook prices, they here lower than the pBook with and additional 30% off. Now they cost JUST as much as a pBook.

=X=

[sirbruce]

Originally Posted by dirtylc

Sirbruce I suggest you look a little deeper then tossing out half-truths, Amazon makes profit. period. Check their 4th quarter earnings for 2009 during the worst economy in 50 years. Give me a break!!!!!

I never said Amazon didn't make a profit. They make a good profit on books and software, and shoes. Most of the other business units are marginal but positive. Ebooks were 5% of Amazon's total book sales, but the profit per book on the mainstream titles is almost zero or even below zero. They're in the process of making the market; profits will come later.