US Justice Department Confirms E-Book Probe

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by carld

With the ebook market growing so fast it's going to be years before "just don't buy it" will have any effect on prices.

I do not believe that assesment holds water.

Because if you read anyway, you help to create non agency authors who have as big a sales presence as the agency authors.

Now the pond is bigger, and the agencies no longer have all the big fish in their net.

That is noticable.

[Bittybye]

This is fantastic, I might buy some books the day they are published instead of waiting until they come down in price. Good on JD for doing something about it!

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by markbot

what about with electricity, gas, bread, water, transportation, education...

If you don't like high prices, DON'T BUY IT!

In what world are any of those things equivalent to a voluntary leisure activity? A voluntary leisure activity that can often be had for free from the library?

Do you people intentionally think of the most idiotic straw men, and then spew that forth?

Here, I'll clue you into how ridiculous this is:

Originally Posted by carld

With the ebook market growing so fast it's going to be years before "just don't buy it" will have any effect on prices.

Everyone has to decide for themselves if an item is worth the asking price. Don't complain about high prices, and then continue to swipe that plastic card. If you think it's too high, don't buy it.

If enough people don't buy something, the person or corporation setting the price will lower it to generate more interest.

This is a personal decision. No two people derive the same utility from the same object.

[ApK]

Chewbacca didn't live on Endor.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

The bottom line is that consumers love the agency model. If they truly objected to it, they'd boycott these publishers.

Ah, but first they have to know who to boycott and set things up. You don't just post a message on a message board like MobileRead advising everyone to stop buying Amazon's ebooks for the 1st month of 2012 for example and expect to get a big turnout. We'd be talking about getting in touch with millions of people across the continental United States alone. And there is the issue of many people not knowing how to stage such a boycott in such a way as to really make a dent in things I'm thinking. Meanwhile while such prep. is going on it's business as usual for the targeted company.

[carld]

Originally Posted by Phogg

I do not believe that assesment holds water.

Because if you read anyway, you help to create non agency authors who have as big a sales presence as the agency authors.

Now the pond is bigger, and the agencies no longer have all the big fish in their net.

That is noticable.

Yes, they'll be able to see that the non-agency market is growing, but they'll also see that general demand is growing and lifting agency publishers along with it. Even if a percentage of people don't purchase agency books, the overall rise in demand will continue to increase the market for agency titles, therefore, as I said, "Just don't buy it" won't matter much if at all until the market matures.

[carld]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

If enough people don't buy something, the person or corporation setting the price will lower it to generate more interest.

Which doesn't contradict what I said. There are simply too many people entering the ebook market for "Don't buy it" to have any measurable effect yet. It will certainly become relevant once the market matures, but that's not going to be for years yet.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by crich70

Ah, but first they have to know who to boycott and set things up. You don't just post a message on a message board like MobileRead advising everyone to stop buying Amazon's ebooks for the 1st month of 2012 for example and expect to get a big turnout. We'd be talking about getting in touch with millions of people across the continental United States alone. And there is the issue of many people not knowing how to stage such a boycott in such a way as to really make a dent in things I'm thinking. Meanwhile while such prep. is going on it's business as usual for the targeted company.

It doesn't have to be organized. If you object to agency pricing, just stop buying those books. Decreased sales will eventually take its toll.

Personally, I don't care if agency pricing is ever stopped. No author is worth those prices. I'll just read something else.

[Season]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

It doesn't have to be organized. If you object to agency pricing, just stop buying those books. Decreased sales will eventually take its toll.

Personally, I don't care if agency pricing is ever stopped. No author is worth those prices. I'll just read something else.

That's exactly what I do. If the book is under agency pricing I won't buy it. It's refreshingly easy. If I absolutely have to have a specific book, I support my independent used bookstore and go retro. I vote with my $$$. I support the publishers that don't use agency pricing, either directly from their web site or through any bookstore other than propriatory Amazon, B & N or ibooks.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

It doesn't have to be organized. If you object to agency pricing, just stop buying those books. Decreased sales will eventually take its toll.

That's what "boycott any ebook over $9.99" types never seem to grasp. If it's only about price, it's not a boycott. Just don't pay the price. Duh.

But this is a little different. If you object not just to the price, but to the control and collusion, the business model itself, then a little organization is required. You'd have have to know to boycott all books by those companies, even those that are priced really well, and let them know why.
Not a great deal of organization required, but at least it puts it marginally in the realm of what could rightfully be termed a boycott.

ApK

[sufue]

Originally Posted by ApK

You'd have have to know to boycott all books by those companies, even those that are priced really well, and let them know why.
ApK

That is what I have done. After the introduction of agency pricing I kept a list of all of the agency books that I DIDN'T buy and about a year after agency pricing went into effect I sorted my list by publisher, and sent each of them a list of what I hadn't bought, and explained to them exactly why.

Of course the silence in response was deafening, except for the one publisher (I forget which, although I did save the e-mail somewhere) who sent me a canned e-mail which said "Thank you for your interest in our e-books", and gave me a list of e-tailers at which I could buy them. So, I'm not sure this did much good. But, if enough folks did it, maybe it would.

I do disagree, however, about boycotting all books from the agency six - I do buy agency books when they are on sale or at what I consider to be a reasonable price. (Since I buy mostly backlist titles, my idea of a reasonable price is pretty low - my shelves are crowded, but not THAT crowded ) I'm a great believer in the power of positive reinforcement, and figure that maybe if publishers start noticing a difference in how many books sell at the lower prices, they will start bringing the prices down. Of course, this is mostly for backlist titles - I doubt this would apply for first-run wildly popular stuff.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by sufue

I'm a great believer in the power of positive reinforcement, and figure that maybe if publishers start noticing a difference in how many books sell at the lower prices,

That's not positive reinforcement, that's letting them know you can be bought off. You're telling them "it's ok for you to fix prices, stifle competition, limit buying freedom, etc...as long as you keep your price point at level x."

Choosing your price point is not a boycott, it's simple market forces at work.
Boycotting is a matter of principle, hurting them in the pocketbook to get them to change a business practice. A sanction.
"We want your product, We would pay your price for your product, but a large bunch of us will do without your product and make you and you shareholders feel it, until you change practice x."

[sufue]

Originally Posted by ApK

That's not positive reinforcement, that's letting them know you can be bought off. You're telling them "it's ok for you to fix prices, stifle competition, limit buying freedom, etc...as long as you keep your price point at level x."

Choosing your price point is not a boycott, it's simple market forces at work.
Boycotting is a matter of principle, hurting them in the pocketbook to get them to change a business practice. A sanction.
"We want your product, We would pay your price for your product, but a large bunch of us will do without your product and make you and you shareholders feel it, until you change practice x."

I guess that depends. I'm not too sure that my objection is a theoretical one to the agency model itself (heresy!!!).

I don't know if they can really be said to have "fixed prices" amongst the six, which is my (non-legal-professional) understanding of price fixing. I guess that's some of what the various investigations are trying to establish - whether there was collusion. For an individual publisher, though, to fix, or try to fix, via agreement with their own retailers (or agents), the prices at which their retailers (or agents) sell their goods is the publisher's privilege. It happens in other industries too - ScubaPro scuba equipment jumps to my mind. And, we're always free to just not buy if we think that price is too high. But, it's a price issue, and it's their privilege to try to keep the prices for their goods high if they wish.

I'm also not sure they have "stifled competition" - I actually rather think they may have short-sightedly encouraged it by pushing authors and readers to other, often more direct, channels. It is a market, and in the long-run the market will find other paths.

And nor do I think that "limiting my buying freedom" is attributable to the agency model, if by that you mean DRM. DRM was (sadly) alive and well long before the agency mess. It's a whole 'nother issue to me.

My objection (just MHO) to the agency model is primarily its impact on prices and that's what my actions are designed to address.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by ApK

But this is a little different. If you object not just to the price, but to the control and collusion, the business model itself, then a little organization is required. You'd have have to know to boycott all books by those companies, even those that are priced really well, and let them know why.
Not a great deal of organization required, but at least it puts it marginally in the realm of what could rightfully be termed a boycott.

ApK

I only object to the pricing. I don't care what motives publishers have or how they implement policy. I don't care if what they're doing is legal or not. The bottom line is that eBooks priced at or higher than their paperback counterparts are overpriced, period.

I won't pay those prices; those that do only have themselves to blame for the continued existence of the agency model.

Since reading is an optional life activity and not a necessity to maintain one's existence upon this planet, my only moral obligation is to not participate in this pricing scheme and move on. I'll express those views on this board, but that's the extent of it.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by ApK

That's not positive reinforcement, that's letting them know you can be bought off. You're telling them "it's ok for you to fix prices, stifle competition, limit buying freedom, etc...as long as you keep your price point at level x."

Choosing your price point is not a boycott, it's simple market forces at work.

And that is all we really want, books available to all of us at prices we consider to be reasonable.

Why would they fix prices and stifle competition if not to push prices up? Everything else makes no sense. The only reason for such illegal practices is to get higher prices. If their price fixing leads to a low price I won't object.