Amazon Signs Up Authors, Writing Publishers Out of Deal

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Sao

I wonder if those people noticed the non-compete clause. If Amazon chooses to enforce it (and why include it if they won't?) many authors could be in for a nasty surprise.

Unless you have an expensive ebook available for sale, I really don't see the advantage. Prime members can only borrow one free ebook a month. Does any indie author really think Amazon Prime members are going to use that to borrow their .99 or 2.99 ebook?I know I'd be borrowing the most expensive ebooks.

The advantage is that a lot of authors sell...100 times the amount of books on AMazon as they do on other retailers because 1. Amazon promotes it Kindle like crazy and 2. 17,000 books is VERY FEW books--which means anyone in the program has a better chance of being noticed.

Amazon had very good promo features. "people who bought..." They start programs like the lending feature, which they then market--and people buy what they see.

Forums, such as this one, are less and less welcome to allow authors. Many people don't want to try independent authors. (Many do.)

So it's a "carrot" deal. I don't happen to feel it's a great carrot for the long term, but that's why I'm asking.

The fine print is NOT fine print. Amazon is VERY, VERY clear that if they catch authors selling outside the exclusivity, they not only will withhold payment (for sales and lending) the author will owe them (so if we're on Amazon with other books, I would imagine they could stop payments altogether if they felt an author owed them.)

They also have a clause that says all books from that author maybe banned from sale on Amazon.

Look, Amazon holds a LOT, LOT, LOT of cards. There are currently 17k books in the prime lending. That's a pittance. An author getting listed in that program has a great chance of being noticed by a reader looking. Put a first book in the series and get the reader hooked? They may go on to buy the rest.

So I understand WHY Amazon is doing it. I also understand WHY authors will sign up for it. I also understand why it's not that great a deal in the long run. I want my books to be read. I want them widely available. What if Amazon stops paying 70 percent next year? And I've done nothing but have my books available through them? It could be a little late to attract a Nook, Sony, etc audience.

When you hand over the keys to the kingdom, don't be surprised if you find yourself out of power.

I really appreciate the input y'all are posting here. It's a very difficult position to be in because, as I said, Amazon is certainly hinting that those in the program are going to see some promo from Amazon. If people are using the "lending" feature they are going to see those books. And from what I've read on forums, people are using the lending feature. They are browsing it, they are using it.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by DreamWriter

Indie authors seem to be signing up for this 90-day Amazon exclusivity contract in droves! The figures I've seen are that at around 10 a.m. MST this morning there were 10,732 total books in the Kindle Owners' Lending Library. Just 4-1/2 hours later, there were 22,500 books!

My husband is choosing NOT to sell his book exclusively at Amazon, even though almost all his sales are there. He sells very few ePub books at Barnes & Noble, but those readers are important to him.

I feel your pain. But I hate the idea of all eggs in one basket. I am also more fond of "partner" than "owned."

[DreamWriter]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

It's a very difficult position to be in because, as I said, Amazon is certainly hinting that those in the program are going to see some promo from Amazon. If people are using the "lending" feature they are going to see those books. And from what I've read on forums, people are using the lending feature. They are browsing it, they are using it.

Take a look at this list of books available for lending through the Kindle Owners' Lending Library (for Amazon Prime members). As I'm typing this, there are 22,762 books there. Readers can choose to borrow only one book per month from the list. Most are going to sort the list based on popularity, average customer review, or price (high to low). Unless your book is near the top of the list, it won't get seen there. Readers aren't going to sort through very many pages before choosing a book to borrow.

This is not a clear-cut decision for many authors. For a few (those with very popular books—especially if they have a series—and most sales at Amazon already), it will be a good opportunity from a financial standpoint; but for most, I don't believe it will pay off.

[Suzanna]

I don't think many of the authors opting in understand the significance of the non-compete clause. In fact, I'd argue that many authors are jumping into this without even realizing there *is* a non-compete clause. Let's look at it again - "or content that is reasonably likely to compete commercially with your Digital Book, diminish its value, or be confused with it".

It's not just that you're giving Amazon exclusive rights to your book. You're agreeing to not publish anything, anywhere based on Amazon's whim. They could very well decide that the 5 page free read you put up on your website will "diminish [the] value" of the book you have with them. Then they'll withhold your royalties because you'll be considered in breach of contract.

Only time will tell whether that will happen. I think it's a toss up between Amazon trying to grab as many rights as they can just in case, but not really intending to keep writers in a strangle hold, and them aggressively policing members who opt into the program. I'd like to think that somewhere down the road an author won't find that Amazon refuses to pay them their royalties because they put up a free read on their site, but frankly I wouldn't be surprised if that does happen.

[SeaKing]

Are there any signs or reports of Amazon being unfair to authors?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by SeaKing

Are there any signs or reports of Amazon being unfair to authors?

Maybe not unfair to authors, but definitely unfair to readers.

[Suzanna]

Originally Posted by SeaKing

Are there any signs or reports of Amazon being unfair to authors?

Well, they are fairly aggressive about price matching. When Kobo had that glitch that lowered the price of some self-published ebooks, Amazon jumped right on it and lowered the prices on their site. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that they'd strictly enforce their non-compete clause. We'll just have to wait and see what they do.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by SeaKing

Are there any signs or reports of Amazon being unfair to authors?

No, not so far. I think the point is more that some publishers have done this to authors (stopping them from publishing a book with the same characters elsewhere). So the non-compete clause could be mis-used.

I think at this point they are attempting to keep authors playing fair: Don't give it away on your website, don't give away too many chapters for free, don't change the title and cover and try to sell it somewhere else.

Authors have been known to be...less than honest, desperate, conniving, and so on. I'm quite sure Amazon has noticed this type of behavior in the past.

There's pros and cons. But a lot of authors have talked in many forums about how many more we sell on Amazon. While NO ONE wants to alienate a single reader, I can still see why it's tempting.

Some people may sort by price or popularity--but a lot of them sort by things like "cozy mystery" or "urban fantasy." And that could mean exposure. I mean, seriously. It worked when there were only a few of us indies joining the ranks two and five years ago. It will likely work again, especially for a "free" lending. Some are going to be cautious, especially at first, saving the "lending" for an expensive book. But after a while, readers may not even notice the price. They might be far more interested in "genre" and grabbing something for a quick weekend or whatever catches their eye.

Not all readers are as...well, we here at mobilread tend to read a LOT and some of us stay organized about what is checked out from the library and what can be had and where. But a lot of my friends read willy-nilly. They grab things when something catches their eyeballs. And Amazon is very good at catching eyeballs right now.

[BearMountainBooks]

I should also point out that B&N has been trying new things and working harder to get books exposed to likely audiences. I think they are trying a lot harder than they were a year ago. So things can change. You never know when one retailer might take off.

[Fbone]

The Hunger Games trilogy claim the top three spots. It looks like Ms Collins will bring home a sizable piece of the $500,000.

[DreamWriter]

Originally Posted by Fbone

The Hunger Games trilogy claim the top three spots. It looks like Ms Collins will bring home a sizable piece of the $500,000.

The Hunger Games is published by Scholastic, one of the big publishers. When the Amazon Prime Kindle Owners' Lending Library was first announced at the beginning of November, only the large publishers were included. At that time, Amazon stated: "For the vast majority of titles, Amazon has reached agreement with publishers to include titles for a fixed fee. In some cases, Amazon is purchasing a title each time it is borrowed by a reader under standard wholesale terms as a no-risk trial to demonstrate to publishers the incremental growth and revenue opportunity that this new service presents."

So, most large publishers are paid a fixed price for each book borrowed, and they are not sharing in the $500,000 pot. That money is only available to those who publish exclusively through Amazon's Kindle Direct Publishing (independent authors and small press). Here's a link to Amazon's press release that was published today.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Fbone

The Hunger Games trilogy claim the top three spots. It looks like Ms Collins will bring home a sizable piece of the $500,000.

So you're saying you don't think it will matter to authors? Or to readers? Or both? Could be. Could be that getting noticed is so difficult, our measly attempts will merely be ignored...

[Andrew Kaufman]

I saw this today. As an author who has books on Amazon, I'm not sure what to make of it. Most of my sales are there anyway, but I don't necessarily want to penalize folks who have Nook or other e-readers. I understand Amazon's motivation--they already have the lion's share of book sales; now it appears they want them all--but I'd hate to see the readers suffer just because they're locked into their current e-readers. In all fairness to them, don't know that I'd jump on this offer myself.

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by DreamWriter

So, most large publishers are paid a fixed price for each book borrowed, and they are not sharing in the $500,000 pot. That money is only available to those who publish exclusively through Amazon's Kindle Direct Publishing (independent authors and small press). Here's a link to Amazon's press release that was published today.

Thanks for the clarification. I'm glad to hear it as surely Scholastic and Ms Collins will earn more from each lend separate from the Select pool.

So, is there a way to determine how many titles are in the KDP Select program?

[DreamWriter]

Originally Posted by Fbone

So, is there a way to determine how many titles are in the KDP Select program?

Not that I know of. This list will show you the books available for lending through the Kindle Owners' Lending Library (for Amazon Prime members), but I'm not aware of any way to separate out the books that are published through KDP Select.