NYT: Apple’s Prices for E-Books May Be Lower Than Expected

[ekaser]

The article says, in part:

But according to at least three people with knowledge of the discussions, who spoke anonymously because of the confidentiality of the talks, Apple inserted provisions requiring publishers to discount e-book prices on best sellers — so that $12.99-to-$14.99 range was merely a ceiling; prices for some titles could be lower, even as low as Amazon’s $9.99. Essentially, Apple wants the flexibility to offer lower prices for the hottest books, those on one of the New York Times best-seller lists, which are heavily discounted in bookstores and on rival retail sites. So, for example, a book that started at $14.99 would drop to $12.99 or less once it hit the best-seller lists.

Moreover, for books where publishers offer comparable hardcover editions at a price below the typical $26, Apple wanted e-book prices to reflect the cheaper hardcover prices. These books might be priced much lower than $12.99, even if they did not hit the best-seller list.

[kwjones]

Yeah, CrunchGear had an article on that as well.

This kind of jumped out at me...

I’m all for more expensive ebooks. The 99 cent song has essentially turned the music business into a freak out fest and the publishing industry is even less prepare for the volcano that’s about to erupt right in the middle of their industry.

I’d say $12.99 is a good price for an ebook. At that price Apple gets $4 and the publisher gets about $8. This, in turn, gets the author 2 cents on a good day.

[Teddman]

Hmmm... We'll see. I'm kind of taking everything that the New York Times says about the iPad with a grain of salt these days. They have an agenda in making it look as attractive as possible to prospective buyers.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Teddman

Hmmm... We'll see. I'm kind of taking everything that the New York Times says about the iPad with a grain of salt these days. They have an agenda in making it look as attractive as possible to prospective buyers.

Oh, please. Individual journalists and editors may have their own passions, but the NYT as an organization doesn't care about Apple sales.

Of course, this really shouldn't be much of a shock to anyone. We'll find out a little more of the real deal soon enough.

[Teddman]

Believe what you want, but there hasn't been a critical word in the NY Times about the iPad since its announcement. They were the SOLE demonstration of a periodical in the iPad presentation, they have an upcoming paid subscription service on the device, and they recently published an article downplaying the significance of e-ink's eyestrain advantage over backlit LCD screens (i.e. the iPad).

They have a definite self-interest in promoting the iPad and an editorial policy bent to that effect.

[ondabeach]

$10 for an eBook..... they're dreaming.

He saw not the approach of his slayer.
He felt not the blade that set free his life's blood.
He did not crash to earth but faded like the day.
Breathing Death's rancid breath he speaks his last.
'But I am Amazon'

Please feel free to substitute Amazon with Apple, Mcmillan or anyone else that thinks that we will accept whatever terms they dictate to us.

[llreader]

Nice! I posted this a couple of hours ago, but the more the merrier!

I have to say, I am not surprised at all.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Teddman

Believe what you want, but there hasn't been a critical word in the NY Times about the iPad since its announcement.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0...-women-cringe/
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0...mazons-kindle/
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/11/te.../11reader.html

And really, they actually haven't said much at all since it was announced. Probably because it isn't actually out yet, so there isn't much to say period.

I might add, I'm no fan of the "slate" concept, especially for most ebook purposes. But I hardly see any particular bias on the part of the NYT, certainly no worse than anyone else, and nowhere near as bad a the tech blogs.

Please spare me your cynicism, kthx

[Teddman]

None of those are negative about the iPad when you actually read the copy (in fact, the third link isn't even primarily about the iPad).

The bottom line is that it's worth keeping in mind the New York Times' relationship with Apple and the Ipad when reading an article like this.

For instance:

But according to at least three people with knowledge of the discussions, who spoke anonymously because of the confidentiality of the talks, Apple inserted provisions requiring publishers to discount e-book prices on best sellers — so that $12.99-to-$14.99 range was merely a ceiling; prices for some titles could be lower, even as low as Amazon’s $9.99. Essentially, Apple wants the flexibility to offer lower prices for the hottest books, those on one of the New York Times best-seller lists, which are heavily discounted in bookstores and on rival retail sites.

Gee, where do you think they found the "three anonymous sources" with inside info about Apple's prices on NY Times own best-seller's list books? I don't think the writer had to walk too far from his desk.

[FireRunner]

I wouldn't read a book on a back light screen. Plus, the iPad's battery only lasts (realistically) 4-5 hours. So, you're going to have to charge it every day. I prefer eReaders that I don't have to charge everyday. It's a book, not a computer!

[Erina]

$26 for a hardback new release? I wish. The average price here in Australia for a new popular hardback is close to $40 which would be approx US$36. I know it includes freight, local taxes etc etc but its still a gouge. So the attraction of downloading at home ( no journey into the mall ) at my convenience and a possible price saving means I cant wait for the eBook store to be available.
But we still have to address the stupid parallel imports rule here so who knows what will happen this year. All very frustrating overall.

[karenr_nz]

@Erina: You think $40AUD is bad for a hardback - in NZ we pay about $55NZD (that's nearly 40USD). And paperbacks here are $25NZD (about $17US)

It's one of the big selling points for ebooks with me. Even at $15US for a new release, I can buy two new ebook releases (with my money going to 2+ authors and publishers) for the same price. At $7US for an ebook, I can buy 5-6 books for the price of a new hardback.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Teddman

None of those are negative about the iPad when you actually read the copy (in fact, the third link isn't even primarily about the iPad).

1st points out how the "iPad" name reminds lots of people of feminine hygiene products; not exactly a glowing review. 2nd expresses an overt opinion that the iPad will be a "poorer choice" for reading than eInk. 3rd points out the possible outrage due to impending higher prices, thanks Apple.

And are other media outlets overflowing with hit pieces on the iPad? Chicago Tribune, perhaps? WaPo? USA Today? CNN? Or is every news outlet in thrall to Apple?

Originally Posted by Teddman

The bottom line is that it's worth keeping in mind the New York Times' relationship with Apple and the Ipad when reading an article like this.

There is no relationship; Jobs is hardly a member of the Sulzberger family. NYT also has a subscription agreement with Amazon; does that taint their coverage of Amazon as well? Amazon and Apple often compete, so which one of these two behemoths is pulling the NYT's strings?

Originally Posted by Teddman

For instance:Gee, where do you think they found the "three anonymous sources" with inside info about Apple's prices on NY Times own best-seller's list books? I don't think the writer had to walk too far from his desk.

Err... The NY Times bestseller list has been a benchmark for booksales for decades. It's not like some sort of top secret list that only publishing insiders have access to. E.g.:

http://www.amazon.com/Books/b?ie=UTF8&node=549028
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/u/fict...oks/379001064/
http://www.borders.com/online/store/ListView_nytfiction

More likely is that someone -- perhaps Apple, perhaps a publisher, possibly both -- is hoping to defuse the outrage over the higher pricing by leaking info. It's a common tactic in business and other fields.

[Teddman]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

And are other media outlets overflowing with hit pieces on the iPad? Chicago Tribune, perhaps? WaPo? USA Today? CNN? Or is every news outlet in thrall to Apple?

It's mainly just Wired and the New York Times. Take the Wall Street Journal, who just published an opinion piece last week that was extremely critical of the iPad:

The Microsofting of Apple? Apple is in danger of becoming preoccupied with zero-sum maneuvering versus hated rivals.

This was just after Jobs paid a visit to the WSJ to assuage their concerns about the iPad's lack of Flash. I don't think you'd see such a piece in the New York Times.

But as you admit you also think there's an ulterior motive to this piece, I don't think it really matters if we continue arguing how much of it comes from the NY Times themselves.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ondabeach

$10 for an eBook..... they're dreaming.

You honestly think that $10 is too high a price to pay for many hours of entertainment? $10 is about the price of a rather cheap take-away pizza, or two or three cups of coffee at somewhere like "Starbucks". I think it's an extremely reasonable price to pay.