Eddie Cue would violate antitrust laws again...

[Barcey]

... but he would take better notes next time.

The spin is starting to ramp up in preparation for the appeal. From Fortune ...
http://fortune.com/2014/12/02/apple-ebooks-litigation/

“Is it a fact that certain book prices went up?” asks Cue. “Yes. If you want to convict us on that, then we’re guilty. I knew some prices were going to go up, but hell, the whole world knew it, because that’s what the publishers were saying: ‘We want to get retailers to raise prices, and if we’re not able to, we’re not going to make the books available digitally.’ At the same time, other prices went down too, because now there was competition in the market.”

Me thinks somebody needs to explain to Mr Cue that prices going down from competition means that one retailer needs to lower the price below what the other retailer is selling at. What Mr. Cue did on behalf of Apple was to make that impossible. Yes prices went up on most ebooks because of that but zero prices went down because of Apple.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Barcey

... but he would take better notes next time.

The spin is starting to ramp up in preparation for the appeal. From Fortune ...
http://fortune.com/2014/12/02/apple-ebooks-litigation/



Me thinks somebody needs to explain to Mr Cue that prices going down from competition means that one retailer needs to lower the price below what the other retailer is selling at. What Mr. Cue did on behalf of Apple was to make that impossible. Yes prices went up on most ebooks because of that but zero prices went down because of Apple.

It is pointed out in the article, that while ebook prices on certain best sellers went up, ebook prices overall did indeed go down.

"Notwithstanding the price rise in key categories of books, prices fell overall, its expert testified."

[bgalbrecht]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

It is pointed out in the article, that while ebook prices on certain best sellers went up, ebook prices overall did indeed go down.

"Notwithstanding the price rise in key categories of books, prices fell overall, its expert testified."

That wasn't my experience. Back when the DOJ was asking for comments, I went back over all of my ebook purchases (almost entirely from Fictionwise), I found that had I purchased all of the ebooks I had purchased before 4/1/2010 in 2011 or 2012, I would have paid about three times as much. Admittedly, many of my purchases were during sales or with discounts from loyalty programs that were no longer allowed by agency pricing.

On the other hand, some of the publishers finally started selling ebook editions of nearly all of their books in print. I think Macmillan may have been the most egregious hold-out. Their SF/F imprint Tor basically didn't sell ebooks until after agency pricing went into effect.

[disconnected]

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

That wasn't my experience. Back when the DOJ was asking for comments, I went back over all of my ebook purchases (almost entirely from Fictionwise), I found that had I purchased all of the ebooks I had purchased before 4/1/2010 in 2011 or 2012, I would have paid about three times as much. Admittedly, many of my purchases were during sales or with discounts from loyalty programs that were no longer allowed by agency pricing.

On the other hand, some of the publishers finally started selling ebook editions of nearly all of their books in print. I think Macmillan may have been the most egregious hold-out. Their SF/F imprint Tor basically didn't sell ebooks until after agency pricing went into effect.

When I first set up Calibre in 2011, I added a price column. I filled in the prices from ereader, Amazon, etc. but gave up on fictionwise titles. Between the cost for subscribing, sales, rebates, credits given for subscribing, credits bought on sale, etc. it was hopeless trying to figure out what I'd actually paid for any particular book.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

That wasn't my experience. Back when the DOJ was asking for comments, I went back over all of my ebook purchases (almost entirely from Fictionwise), I found that had I purchased all of the ebooks I had purchased before 4/1/2010 in 2011 or 2012, I would have paid about three times as much. Admittedly, many of my purchases were during sales or with discounts from loyalty programs that were no longer allowed by agency pricing.

On the other hand, some of the publishers finally started selling ebook editions of nearly all of their books in print. I think Macmillan may have been the most egregious hold-out. Their SF/F imprint Tor basically didn't sell ebooks until after agency pricing went into effect.

I went back and compared what I spent per book under agency at Amazon with what I spend per book prior to agency and found that it was slightly less. People tend to forget that Amazon didn't price _all_ ebooks at $9.99, just some best seller type books. Whither an individual spent more or less really just depends on what mix of books they bought.

[crich70]

We want to get retailers to raise prices, and if we’re not able to, we’re not going to make the books available digitally.’

I think that smacks of something nasty myself. Basically if they can't get what they want they won't provide what the customer wants to buy. Or at least that's how that sounds to me. It's like someone is selling lemonade at .50 a cup and expects their neighbor (who is also selling lemonade) to not sell it at .10 a cup even though in the long run the neighbor will make more profit than they will. The customer isn't there for the seller, the seller is there for the customer. Sure they have to make a profit so they can pay their own bills and stay in business, but saying they 'won't provide' as opposed to 'we can't provide' smells to me of just plain greed.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

It is pointed out in the article, that while ebook prices on certain best sellers went up, ebook prices overall did indeed go down.

"Notwithstanding the price rise in key categories of books, prices fell overall, its expert testified."

There are lies, damn lies and statistics. Did they count the list price before agency or the discounted price? Did they include free ebook promotions in the average price? The conspiracy that Apple facilitated removed any form of retailer price discount, or coupon so it's ludicrous to claim that it caused increased competition that drove down prices.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by crich70

I think that smacks of something nasty myself. Basically if they can't get what they want they won't provide what the customer wants to buy. Or at least that's how that sounds to me. It's like someone is selling lemonade at .50 a cup and expects their neighbor (who is also selling lemonade) to not sell it at .10 a cup even though in the long run the neighbor will make more profit than they will. The customer isn't there for the seller, the seller is there for the customer. Sure they have to make a profit so they can pay their own bills and stay in business, but saying they 'won't provide' as opposed to 'we can't provide' smells to me of just plain greed.

The publishers admitted that the conspiracy to window the release of ebooks was doomed to failure because some of the publishers recognized that it would only cause an increase in piracy. I agree that was every bit as disturbing as the price fixing and that should also be recognized as an antitrust violation.

Eddie Cue also admitted that Apple (Steve Jobs) was considering making a deal with Amazon to divide the market. He would offer Amazon that if they stay out of the music business then Apple would stay out of the ebook business. They obviously didn't think that antitrust laws applied to them. The claim that they did nothing wrong is laughable.

[DiapDealer]

Retail to retail (list is irrelevant), before and after agency; the average price for ebooks—ebooks that the vast amount of book-buying consumers wanted to buy—went up. I don't know how anyone could intelligently try to posit otherwise.

It is quite possible that a huge number of books that John Q. Public showed no interest in buying might have been unaffected by agency for the most part. I'll gladly concede that (but I don't really believe it).

[bgalbrecht]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I went back and compared what I spent per book under agency at Amazon with what I spend per book prior to agency and found that it was slightly less. People tend to forget that Amazon didn't price _all_ ebooks at $9.99, just some best seller type books. Whither an individual spent more or less really just depends on what mix of books they bought.

The loyalty programs at Fictionwise, Book on Board, Diesel, tended to give rebates that could be used on any book, so it was often possible to buy one book on sale, and get rebates that were used on other books. One example of this at Fictionwise was that I bought several Stephen King novels at hardcover prices (like $35 and $50), where I got a 100% rebate, and then I used the rebate on other books that were on sale. So Fictionwise got $85, and I got the King novels and another 5-6 books. It makes price comparison a little bit apples to oranges, so you really had to look at the cost of all of the books before and after agency pricing. Because I really exploited the Fictionwise loyalty program, agency pricing really was over twice as expensive for the same books.

I never bought from Amazon until after agency pricing went into effect and discovered that sometimes Amazon would have a sale price on an agency priced book that the epub retailers did not have. I always wondered if those Amazon only sale prices were the fault of the publishers or the retailers.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Barcey

The publishers admitted that the conspiracy to window the release of ebooks was doomed to failure because some of the publishers recognized that it would only cause an increase in piracy. I agree that was every bit as disturbing as the price fixing and that should also be recognized as an antitrust violation.

Eddie Cue also admitted that Apple (Steve Jobs) was considering making a deal with Amazon to divide the market. He would offer Amazon that if they stay out of the music business then Apple would stay out of the ebook business. They obviously didn't think that antitrust laws applied to them. The claim that they did nothing wrong is laughable.

Methinks you are projecting far more into the article than what was actually said.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

The loyalty programs at Fictionwise, Book on Board, Diesel, tended to give rebates that could be used on any book, so it was often possible to buy one book on sale, and get rebates that were used on other books. One example of this at Fictionwise was that I bought several Stephen King novels at hardcover prices (like $35 and $50), where I got a 100% rebate, and then I used the rebate on other books that were on sale. So Fictionwise got $85, and I got the King novels and another 5-6 books. It makes price comparison a little bit apples to oranges, so you really had to look at the cost of all of the books before and after agency pricing. Because I really exploited the Fictionwise loyalty program, agency pricing really was over twice as expensive for the same books.

I never bought from Amazon until after agency pricing went into effect and discovered that sometimes Amazon would have a sale price on an agency priced book that the epub retailers did not have. I always wondered if those Amazon only sale prices were the fault of the publishers or the retailers.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Third party loyalty programs aren't particularly germane when trying to figure out if the agency model raised or lowered consumer prices.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You are comparing apples and oranges. Third party loyalty programs aren't particularly germane when trying to figure out if the agency model raised or lowered consumer prices.

They're very germane when people who availed themselves of those loyalty discount programs couldn't do so anymore because agency shut discounting down.

What would you have us compare? The list price we never paid pre-agency, to the imposed minimum we all paid during agency?

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You are comparing apples and oranges. Third party loyalty programs aren't particularly germane when trying to figure out if the agency model raised or lowered consumer prices.

They aren't germane when it's your money.
When it's my money they are.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

You are comparing apples and oranges. Third party loyalty programs aren't particularly germane when trying to figure out if the agency model raised or lowered consumer prices.

Phogg and double DiapDealer

After nonsense like this, do you really wonder why everyone here disagrees with you on principle?