Post by micah on Jan 31, 2010 12:46:54 GMT -5
All right, so who wants to chime in on this weekend's publishing weirdness?
In case you haven't heard, on Friday 29 Jan Amazon removed the Add To Shopping Cart option on all Macmillian titles (including the TOR/Forge SciFi and Fantasy imprints). The books are still available through Amazon, but only through third party sellers. Those wishing to purchase a Macmillian title are rerouted to the alternate sellers.
It appears that the dust up is the result of a disagreement between the CEOs of the various companies on the price of digital books. All of the details can be found at the NYT Tech page: bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/amazon-pulls-macmillan-books-over-e-book-price-disagreement/
John Sargent, Macmillian CEO offered his side of the story in a paid advertisement which ran in Publishers Lunch the following day: www.publishersmarketplace.com/lunch/free/
As of this writing, Amazon head man Jeff Bezos has yet to make a public statement.
I've been totally fascinated by this story and have been checking sites fanatically all weekend long. Some of the best analysis/interesting comments I have seen so far have come from Sci Fi author/blogger John Scalzi : whatever.scalzi.com/2010/01/30/a-quick-note-on-ebook-pricing/ and whatever.scalzi.com/2010/01/30/its-all-about-timing/ and author/tech guru Cory Doctorow: www.boingboing.net/2010/01/29/amazon-and-macmillan.html.
My Thoughts (more than a little jumbled):
So what do you think? Is this a real boycott by Amazon or simply a weekend long marketing ploy? It smacks of bargaining chip to me, like Bezos is drawing a line in the sand and saying he's not going to be pushed around by any publishing concern, no matter how large. That this fracas happened to coincide with the unveiling of Apple's new iPad is probably not coincidental. Ever since the rumors of the tablet device started they have been accompanied by the title "Kindle Killer" and the possibility of an iTunes-like store for digital books for the device.
Amazon has done a good job of cornering the market up to this point. The Kindle is undoubtedly the biggest player in the digital reader game. It's the name people recognize. This has allowed Amazon to pretty much do what it wants with digital books including setting the price and controlling who can read them and where (through DRM protection). Everyone remembers the Orwell SNAFU from last year, right? Part of the reason the Kindle is so popular is that Amazon has the ability to sell so many different titles in digital format. It is also exceptionally easy to buy and download them from the Amazon site, a website that almost everyone is at least familiar with.
I'm not the only person to notice the similarities between this and the rise of the iPod. Apple's was buy no means the first or even best to hit the market. It did, however, come linked to a way of finding and purchasing digital music (copy protected music much like a Kindle book) which was easy for even the technologically challenged. Also, all songs were the same price ($0.99) so there was no need to try and figure out where the best deal was (just like Amazon's $9.99 price point).
I've stated it elsewhere, but I'm not really a fan of the Kindle for a number of reasons. I do have a Kindle app on my phone, but my new digital reader is a Sony. And before those who know what a huge Apple Geek I am ask: No, I do not regret my purchase and No, I do not plan on getting an iPad anytime in the foreseeable future.
As for the current brew-ha-ha, I am all for competition in the marketplace. It brings down prices, forces corporations to listen to consumers, and drives technological innovation. If this is what it takes to bust up Amazon's lock on the market, yay.
I see Amazon as the potential loser here, at least from a public opinion stand point. Amazon has a rather rosy reputation as a wonder work place and all around awesome web store which has been getting a little tarnished lately. There was the accidental removal of adult content, a lawsuit brought about by a POD company, and allegations of insane work hours. The disagreement with Macmillian could get much more media coverage and could therefore end up being a much bigger black eye for the company.
[Don't get me wrong, I am in no way an Amazon "hater." I find that they are wonderful, especially for the purchase of out of town gifts. Their catalog is extensive and their search engines finely tuned. Their recommendations are usually right on the mark as well. I have discovered a number of new authors because of them.]
As for the pricing itself, I'm conflicted. There are things you can point to which explain the price of a hardcover/trade/mass market release. There's publishing costs including typesetting, resource material gathering (paper, glue, etc), manufacture, distribution, promotion, the list goes on. Paying the author is only a (sadly very small) portion of this. Most of these fees are not pertinent to digital books. They must be "typeset," stored somewhere, and perhaps promoted. There's really no reason that a digital copy of a new release should be priced as high as the hardcover. It makes no logical sense for the price to later change to reflect a mass market release, unless the value of the product is in some way linked to its age.
In other words, publishers can set the prices for their digital books as high or as low as they want.
Lower prices are great for readers, but since most authors' contracts dictate that they receive a percentage of each unit sold, lower prices mean less money for the writers.
I'm probably heading off topic here. Perhaps the price discussion warrants its own thread.
Anyway, main question again Amazon/Macmillian, what do you think?
In case you haven't heard, on Friday 29 Jan Amazon removed the Add To Shopping Cart option on all Macmillian titles (including the TOR/Forge SciFi and Fantasy imprints). The books are still available through Amazon, but only through third party sellers. Those wishing to purchase a Macmillian title are rerouted to the alternate sellers.
It appears that the dust up is the result of a disagreement between the CEOs of the various companies on the price of digital books. All of the details can be found at the NYT Tech page: bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/amazon-pulls-macmillan-books-over-e-book-price-disagreement/
John Sargent, Macmillian CEO offered his side of the story in a paid advertisement which ran in Publishers Lunch the following day: www.publishersmarketplace.com/lunch/free/
As of this writing, Amazon head man Jeff Bezos has yet to make a public statement.
I've been totally fascinated by this story and have been checking sites fanatically all weekend long. Some of the best analysis/interesting comments I have seen so far have come from Sci Fi author/blogger John Scalzi : whatever.scalzi.com/2010/01/30/a-quick-note-on-ebook-pricing/ and whatever.scalzi.com/2010/01/30/its-all-about-timing/ and author/tech guru Cory Doctorow: www.boingboing.net/2010/01/29/amazon-and-macmillan.html.
My Thoughts (more than a little jumbled):
So what do you think? Is this a real boycott by Amazon or simply a weekend long marketing ploy? It smacks of bargaining chip to me, like Bezos is drawing a line in the sand and saying he's not going to be pushed around by any publishing concern, no matter how large. That this fracas happened to coincide with the unveiling of Apple's new iPad is probably not coincidental. Ever since the rumors of the tablet device started they have been accompanied by the title "Kindle Killer" and the possibility of an iTunes-like store for digital books for the device.
Amazon has done a good job of cornering the market up to this point. The Kindle is undoubtedly the biggest player in the digital reader game. It's the name people recognize. This has allowed Amazon to pretty much do what it wants with digital books including setting the price and controlling who can read them and where (through DRM protection). Everyone remembers the Orwell SNAFU from last year, right? Part of the reason the Kindle is so popular is that Amazon has the ability to sell so many different titles in digital format. It is also exceptionally easy to buy and download them from the Amazon site, a website that almost everyone is at least familiar with.
I'm not the only person to notice the similarities between this and the rise of the iPod. Apple's was buy no means the first or even best to hit the market. It did, however, come linked to a way of finding and purchasing digital music (copy protected music much like a Kindle book) which was easy for even the technologically challenged. Also, all songs were the same price ($0.99) so there was no need to try and figure out where the best deal was (just like Amazon's $9.99 price point).
I've stated it elsewhere, but I'm not really a fan of the Kindle for a number of reasons. I do have a Kindle app on my phone, but my new digital reader is a Sony. And before those who know what a huge Apple Geek I am ask: No, I do not regret my purchase and No, I do not plan on getting an iPad anytime in the foreseeable future.
As for the current brew-ha-ha, I am all for competition in the marketplace. It brings down prices, forces corporations to listen to consumers, and drives technological innovation. If this is what it takes to bust up Amazon's lock on the market, yay.
I see Amazon as the potential loser here, at least from a public opinion stand point. Amazon has a rather rosy reputation as a wonder work place and all around awesome web store which has been getting a little tarnished lately. There was the accidental removal of adult content, a lawsuit brought about by a POD company, and allegations of insane work hours. The disagreement with Macmillian could get much more media coverage and could therefore end up being a much bigger black eye for the company.
[Don't get me wrong, I am in no way an Amazon "hater." I find that they are wonderful, especially for the purchase of out of town gifts. Their catalog is extensive and their search engines finely tuned. Their recommendations are usually right on the mark as well. I have discovered a number of new authors because of them.]
As for the pricing itself, I'm conflicted. There are things you can point to which explain the price of a hardcover/trade/mass market release. There's publishing costs including typesetting, resource material gathering (paper, glue, etc), manufacture, distribution, promotion, the list goes on. Paying the author is only a (sadly very small) portion of this. Most of these fees are not pertinent to digital books. They must be "typeset," stored somewhere, and perhaps promoted. There's really no reason that a digital copy of a new release should be priced as high as the hardcover. It makes no logical sense for the price to later change to reflect a mass market release, unless the value of the product is in some way linked to its age.
In other words, publishers can set the prices for their digital books as high or as low as they want.
Lower prices are great for readers, but since most authors' contracts dictate that they receive a percentage of each unit sold, lower prices mean less money for the writers.
I'm probably heading off topic here. Perhaps the price discussion warrants its own thread.
Anyway, main question again Amazon/Macmillian, what do you think?