tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post5679868358789719197..comments2024-03-28T02:00:11.260-05:00Comments on A Newbie's Guide to Publishing: Amazon/Hachette Negotiations Finally EndJA Konrathhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comBlogger92125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-69046532446693913712014-11-16T19:20:00.287-06:002014-11-16T19:20:00.287-06:00I can't resist:
++You're contractually re...I can't resist:<br /><br />++You're contractually requiring me to set my price at $14.99 for the latest Stephen King release?++<br /><br />This has nothing to do with the discussion you were responding to that was about your assertion that 30% for indie books is too high (OK, you did not say unfair, just too high...does that mean it seems fair to you even when it is too high?). Bringing up Amazon's hypothetical dealings with Stephen King's publisher on a book that would not even be subject to 30% under indie terms is a perfect example of one of your many non-sequiturs. I had no idea what your point you were making.<br /><br />++When will Amazon explain about the pricing codex++<br /><br />This codex is something you seem to have made up entirely out of whole cloth. Amazon once said that some books may need to be priced higher when it argued for an ideal pricing of $9.99 or lower for most ebooks, and it seems that since then they have accomodated the possibility for higher priced books into both their contracts with the big publishers and their existing terms with indies. There is no codex and no need for a codex describing exceptions for higher priced books under current terms for selling on Amazon, as the terms for higher priced books are already clearly delineated (even if they are unnecessarily high or even predatory). As Joe has suggested, it is their website and they get to set or negotiate the terms. If you or any publisher finds them acceptable, fine. If not, then go somewhere else to sell your higher priced book(s), as you already are doing.<br /><br />++Why not ask what B&N does to justify earning 50% of a paper book's list price?++<br /><br />You brought up the margin in physical bookstores upthread to make a point and so did Joe here, and yet now you say it is irrelevant. It is a valid question: What do retailers do to deserve their margin? At least half a dozen commenters on this thread have stated why they think Amazon is justified in charging 30% and you have not responded to any of their points except with untrue claims, like saying that Amazon does nothing for us to help market our books.<br /><br />Finally, you keep bringing up the 65%. Most of us are not affected much if at all. You are affected and that is of course unfortunate for you and others in your situation. Most of us will express our opinion if asked but we do not spend a lot of time or effort trying to get it changed as it is not generally a pressing concern for most indie authors. So sue us.<br /><br />Your arguments keep coming back to the same points over and over, but there is little motivation on our part (or for that matter on Amazon's part) to consider your pet peeves further when it is clear that you do not really engage in an exchange of ideas and viewpoints, but instead hold your view as invariably correct, and everyone else's as invariably wrong. That is in part why I suggested you reconsider your communication style.<br /><br />And finally, perhaps as a fish, I do not really need to consider the sky very much until I sprout lungs and wings. For now, I am enjoying the water :)<br /><br />Nirmalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14620667876235314509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-10004437972268078182014-11-16T16:10:49.589-06:002014-11-16T16:10:49.589-06:00And are you an apologist for a giant retailer?
I&...<i>And are you an apologist for a giant retailer?</i><br /><br />I'm an activist for authors. At this moment, Amazon's agenda is beneficial to authors. I'm not a paid consultant. <br /><br />I've never publicly sided with Amazon when I feel they are behaving badly. Publishers have been treating authors poorly for decades, and Shatz invariably takes their side. He's become a self-parody.<br /><br />Do you think you actually replied to my responses, Rich? Because you didn't. <br /><br /><i>a median applied to niche and individual skus is not useful.</i><br /><br />You're referring to the 3 million niche Kindle titles available on Amazon? You think Amazon came to its pricing decisions using a median applied to that niche?<br /><br />I'll have some of whatever you're smoking. I bet it's a lot of fun.<br /><br /><i>"Agency" pricing is used all the time in many different industries. </i><br /><br />I see why Gaughran banned you. You simply keep repeating the same nonsense over and over without responding to the many examples exposing it as nonsense.<br /><br />How many times in this thread have I said that agency pricing isn't what the negotiations were about, and that both Amazon and I are fine with agency?<br /><br /><i>advocate on behalf of a $75B corporation in a struggle with a $15B collective entity.</i><br /><br />I love this canard. You do know Amazon just posted quarterly losses, right? They innovate, invest in their own growth, and don't make close to the same profits at that $15B cartel known as the publishing industry. <br /><br />BTW, I advocate on behalf of authors, and explain why Amazon is a viable and preferable choice when pursuing book sales. <br /><br /><i>The article is bad because your assumptions are incorrect. </i><br /><br />And your hair is blue. Because I say so. Why should I be bothered proving it with, you know, facts and logic?<br /><br /><i>I don't quite understand why you think agency pricing is so BAD for authors who are signed with publishers yet so WONDERFUL for indies who currently live in just such a regimen.</i><br /><br />I'm done with you. If you can't bother reading what I write, I can't bother responding to your drivel.<br /><br />On the off chance that some new writer is reading this and hasn't heard me say this a billion times already, high priced ebooks mean less money for authors. That's why, when I got my rights back and could price my ebooks reasonably, my income went up 10x. <br /><br />Publishers want high priced ebooks to protect their paper distribution cartel. Only a few high-tier bestsellers benefit from this protection. All other authors get screwed. JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-49403682396540996692014-11-16T14:58:16.592-06:002014-11-16T14:58:16.592-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nirmalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14620667876235314509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-72639475843259073292014-11-16T13:19:47.341-06:002014-11-16T13:19:47.341-06:00+++ Because Shatzkin is a status quo apologist for...+++ Because Shatzkin is a status quo apologist for big publishing houses? +++<br /><br />And are you an apologist for a giant retailer?<br /><br />+++ 30% for a download? Really? What are you doing to justify that huge margin grab? +++<br /><br />You're contractually requiring me to set my price at $14.99 for the latest Stephen King release? Really? What are you doing to justify that 33% premium.<br /><br />It's called being a publisher.<br /><br />In this case, the author is the most popular writer of horror and suspense on the planet. We feel justified in charging a premium for early access to his next novel. And if we're wrong, the market will teach us a hard lesson. However, it seems the market hasn't. And Stephen did transform the entire horror genre into one that many feel now deserves to be thought of as literature.<br /><br />By the way Jeff, before you start sniffling about the unfairness of it all, we note you buy those iPhones from Apple at "agency" pricing and don't even mention the word "wholesale" where Tim Cook can hear, lest he make you fly down to Cupertino, wear a wetsuit, sit on a chair in his office, balance a colored rubber ball on your nose, and go "arf, arf, arf" while clapping your hands together.<br /><br />+++ Why not ask what B&N does to justify earning 50% of a paper book's list price? Why do they get that huge margin grab? +++<br /><br />Why not ask Amazon what it does justify earning 30% when all it does is provide a file upload/download? And why is this issue of relevance to an indie? How about some more info on marketing and sales tactics for indies. Who cares about B&N?<br /><br />+++ Why can't I price above $9.99? +++<br /><br />When will Amazon explain about the pricing codex and tell us how we can get on it and thus escape a predatory 65% margin grab? And also the slamming on international sales?<br /><br />+++ When did Jeff Bezos learn more about my audience than me? +++<br /><br />LMAO. When did you learn more about pricing ebooks than Jeff Bezos, who has access to all of Amazon's sales data and customer habits? +++<br /><br />LAMOATPWDKTMATWAISINU.<br /><br />Translated, that means laughing madly out loud at the person who doesn't know that a median applied to niche and individual skus is not useful.<br /><br />And what's up with the 65% margin grab on international sales?<br /><br />+++ What don't you understand about capitalism? +++<br /><br />What didn't Amazon understand about capitalism? "Agency" pricing is used all the time in many different industries. But, I note that Howey and all the rest of you were quite happy to advocate on behalf of a $75B corporation in a struggle with a $15B collective entity.<br /><br />Now, that's over.<br /><br />I think you, and Hugh Howey, and David Gauhgran and all the rest of you should use your influence, such as it is, to persuade Amazon to lift these ridiculous restrictions and predatory price grabs. That would help indies.<br /><br />Why not advocate on behalf of the real little guys? Capitalism does not preclude lobbying and persuasion. And pressure. As Amazon demonstrated to the Hachette authors.<br /><br />I note that you've written ANOTHER articles on the evils of agency publishing. The article is bad because your assumptions are incorrect. Publishers do not agency price all their books and agency price their top titles for X period of time before dropping back to retail. I cover this in greater detail on my blog.<br /><br />Regardless, for indies, the article is totally irrelevant, except for the fact I don't quite understand why you think agency pricing is so BAD for authors who are signed with publishers yet so WONDERFUL for indies who currently live in just such a regimen.<br /><br />Now, this really IS it for me. I have two new reviews to get up, on for the "Orb of Chaos" and one for "Beyond Cloud Nine."<br /><br />When it comes to indies, I try to put my time, which is money, where my mouth is.<br /> Rick Chapmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01874000957757021045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-28109488715197727632014-11-16T12:32:24.462-06:002014-11-16T12:32:24.462-06:00Definition of predatory: "seeking to exploit ...Definition of predatory: "seeking to exploit or oppress others." I'd call that an accusation of Amazon being unfair.<br />Graeme Inghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09641039815141105076noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-18550131148929172672014-11-16T12:29:41.431-06:002014-11-16T12:29:41.431-06:00+++ I am sorry to say it has worked on me now also...+++ I am sorry to say it has worked on me now also. +++<br /><br />That's fine, Nirmala. Sometimes a fish just needs to be a fish.<br /><br />But please don't misquote me. I never said anything about Amazon being "unfair."<br /><br />I said they were "high" at 30 points and "predatory" at 65%.<br /><br />Which is an accurate statement.Rick Chapmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01874000957757021045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-75071971102394920562014-11-15T18:24:56.076-06:002014-11-15T18:24:56.076-06:00Go to Mike Shatzkin's blog. I get a different ...<i>Go to Mike Shatzkin's blog. I get a different reception. I wonder why that is?</i><br /><br />Because Shatzkin is a status quo apologist for big publishing houses?<br /><br /><i>30% for a download? Really? What are you doing to justify that huge margin grab?</i><br /><br />It's called being a retailer. In this case, the retailer is the most popular retailer on the Internet, and the one that innovated the most popular ebook reader on the planet.<br /><br />Why not ask what B&N does to justify earning 50% of a paper book's list price? Why do they get that huge margin grab?<br /><br /><i>Why can't I price above $9.99?</i><br /><br />You can. Who is stopping you? But you'll only earn 35% on Amazon. When you create your own online retailer used by millions of people, you can set the percentages you want.<br /><br /><i>When did Jeff Bezos learn more about my audience than me?</i><br /><br />LMAO. When did you learn more about pricing ebooks than Jeff Bezos, who has access to all of Amazon's sales data and customer habits?<br /><br /><i>What's up with the 65% margin grab on international sales?</i><br /><br />What don't you understand about capitalism? Seriously. If I create a website and want to charge customers a million dollars a year to access it, I can. That's not a "grab". It's a free market system. JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-84054910432063498612014-11-15T17:54:20.664-06:002014-11-15T17:54:20.664-06:00Rick: I said that your way of communicating makes ...Rick: I said that your way of communicating makes people want to tune you out. I am sorry to say it has worked on me now also.<br /><br />I did learn some things from reading your blog, so thank you for that.Nirmalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14620667876235314509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-47778550001092873382014-11-15T17:00:09.260-06:002014-11-15T17:00:09.260-06:00+++ The way you comment and blog is full of unsupp...+++ The way you comment and blog is full of unsupported statements and non-sequitur. +++<br /><br />Nirmala, when we first began talking, you consistently misstated basic facts about publishing and the numbers. And you have, in a sort of left handed way, acknowledged this.<br /><br />I will say I have a hard time understanding why all of a sudden you didn't understand the difference between gross and net. I certainly wrote about it.<br /><br />You have learned a few things, but not enough. Asking you "what is your time worth" is not a "non sequitur." It is a fundamental marketing and sales question every business person must ask themselves. It's a spreadsheet exercise. I've been invited to speak at DBW in January and will take people through this.<br /><br />Nor have I made any unsupported statements. What I have stated is openly available and can be critiqued. I don't threaten to "ban" people who disagree with me and when I make a mistake (and I don't make many because this really isn't a complicated subject) I say so.<br /><br />+++ You may not care, but when you get the same feedback over and over +++<br /><br />Sigh. Really. Think this through. <br /><br />Go to Mike Shatzkin's blog. I get a different reception. I wonder why that is?<br /><br />Here's what you need to do. As a publisher, think about what's in your business interests. Analyze all in that context.<br /><br />I've asked some very hard business questions here. There's been a lot of fuzzy ad hominem nonsense about me, my narcissism, blah, blah, blah.<br /><br />Really. Who cares.<br /><br />Here are the hard business questions that this site and the rest of AAAG need to take up now that Amazon and the publishers are all nicely nicely.<br /><br />30% for a download? Really? What are you doing to justify that huge margin grab?<br /><br />Why can't I price above $9.99? Maybe that makes sense for me. When did Jeff Bezos learn more about my audience than me? And I can't believe that no on here has thought this through and not introduced one coherent thought on the problems with this.<br /><br />Since Jeff has announced Amazonium Codexorum, isn't it time we all learned how it worked?<br /><br />What's up with the 65% margin grab on international sales?<br /><br />That's a start. Lots of other things people need to think through. If you hate publishers, not my issue. You're a publisher and now you get to deal with a big, powerful, margin hungry channel. <br /><br />I suggest you start to think about training the Big Cat to not need to feed on your liver. Try to train it to subsist on some extra digits you really don't need.Rick Chapmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01874000957757021045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-9294125373201823712014-11-15T16:46:17.812-06:002014-11-15T16:46:17.812-06:00I ask your permission to respond FIRST on my blog....<i>I ask your permission to respond FIRST on my blog.</i><br /><br />I have no interest in that, Rick. I'll engage you here in the comments. You showed up here, remember? If I'd left a comment on your blog, that's were we would debate. But I didn't. Because your blog is ridiculous. Your logic is non existent. Your examples are misleading. And you're just plain wrong about nearly everything.<br /><br />If you become famous and influential, I promise I'll fisk you some day. Lemme know when that happens.JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-65701811814742317662014-11-15T16:27:35.167-06:002014-11-15T16:27:35.167-06:00+++ Respond here. People don't read your blog....+++ Respond here. People don't read your blog. If you want your rebuttal to be read, this is the place for it. +++<br /><br />No. As a courtesy to you, I ask your permission to respond FIRST on my blog. I don't have to do this, but I think it the proper thing to do. Also, it helps everyone keep everything straight. The bouncing back and forth is confusing and this will unify the argument.<br /><br />Up to you.Rick Chapmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01874000957757021045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-53672770393736795822014-11-15T13:01:15.109-06:002014-11-15T13:01:15.109-06:00Rick: I hope you can maybe hear this, but Joe is r...Rick: I hope you can maybe hear this, but Joe is right. The way you comment and blog is full of unsupported statements and non-sequitur. I have mentioned this to you before in our other discussions. You also have some valid points and a unique background to share, but it seems clear that a lot of people never get your points, and just tune you out after a while.<br /><br />You may not care, but when you get the same feedback over and over, you might want to step away from that image of masculine beauty in your mirror for a while if you truly want to communicate your ideas :) <br /><br />There is a very wise statement that the meaning of a communication is the message received, not the message sent. You may not be intending the messages that most people are receiving, but that is still the meaning of your communications.Nirmalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14620667876235314509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-51094047977653588492014-11-15T12:48:32.982-06:002014-11-15T12:48:32.982-06:00That's my takeway from this. But in the long g...<i>That's my takeway from this. But in the long game, paper is going to become niche. Then these incentives will indeed force publishers to lower ebook prices. The paper midlist is already shrinking, and the indie list is gobbling up more and more of the market.</i><br /><br />As much as I like to argue, I think we are in basic agreement here. Amazon might be okay with some forms of agency pricing, but not the kind they have here, most likely. My take on the negotiations is that they basically gave up at the end, realizing that they were better off just letting those market forces accomplish over time what negotiations could not. If publishers were smart, they'd have tried to get ahead of the curve, rather than lag behind and pay the price later, but the general corporate strategy in the industry is to fight change rather than be the leader of it. It will pay off in the short term, but not the long term. And short term is really what their boards want for their stock prices. Amazon operates very differently.<br /><br /><br />I still think you overestimate the power of the self-publishing industry as yet. Those 500,000 titles only generate about $400,000,000 of gross sales, and that's not enough to replace the billions from the big publishers. But, it's a growing number, and someday it really will threaten the dominance of the big publishers. And you're right that the publishers love discounting, when it comes to print books. With ebooks, they are scared shitless by it. You know why. Rather than hanging by their own rope, they will drown in their own shit. That's about the only distinction between our viewpoints here. Broken Yogihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02257804418740860542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-50398140408550913902014-11-15T12:35:50.823-06:002014-11-15T12:35:50.823-06:00If you want, I will put your entire refutation up ...<i>If you want, I will put your entire refutation up on my blog and respond to it there.</i><br /><br />Respond here. People don't read your blog. If you want your rebuttal to be read, this is the place for it.<br /><br />FYI, this is how you reply point by point.<br /><br /><i>Amazon having no problem with agency is wrong. </i><br /><br />Amazon has no problem with agency. For the eyerollingeth time, they have a a problem with being unable to discount. Per their May 29th statement:<br /><br />"In fact, the 30% share of total revenue is what Hachette forced us to take in 2010 when they illegally colluded with their competitors to raise e-book prices. We had no problem with the 30% -- we did have a big problem with the price increases."<br /><br />http://www.amazon.com/forum/kindle?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx1D7SY3BVSESG&cdThread=Tx3J0JKSSUIRCMT<br /><br /><i>saw you take a quote completely out of context</i><br /><br />If that's the case, Rick, to debate properly you have to tell us which quote I took out of context.<br /><br /><i>At that point I begin to MEGO</i><br /><br />MEGO? Give me a break. I had to wade through your whole nonsensical blog post, and only responded in brief because I didn't want to waste an hour responding to all the stupid. <br /><br />If you want to play, go upthread and reply to the points I made. Every one of them.<br /><br />If you want to just say stuff without defending it, I'm not interested in taking this any further.<br /><br />Show me I'm wrong. Prove it. Use links. Quote me directly. JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-1403804192881510172014-11-15T10:03:01.130-06:002014-11-15T10:03:01.130-06:00+++ I shredded your ridiculous blog post. You didn...+++ I shredded your ridiculous blog post. You didn't reply to single point I made. +++<br /><br />You didn't shred anything. At least one person here has noted your comment about Amazon having no problem with agency is wrong. I read further through your post and saw you take a quote completely out of context and ask why I was talking about "you" when clearly I wasn't. At that point I begin to MEGO out as it's tedious to both argue facts and point out distortions of quotes at the same time. You also started to swear and I find that distasteful.<br /><br />If you want, I will put your entire refutation up on my blog and respond to it there. You are welcome to respond in any way (but no bad language and threats). I will reciprocate by placing my responses to your points and give you the last word on both this blog and mine. I don't have the time to engage in a major flame war.<br /><br />Or not. Your choice. I have two novels to get to work on and some indie reviews to write and don't want to overly indulge in blog wars.Rick Chapmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01874000957757021045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-6862329120318802132014-11-15T10:02:52.043-06:002014-11-15T10:02:52.043-06:00Small point, but cars do have the MSRP on the wind...Small point, but cars do have the MSRP on the window sticker....but almost everyone knows that is not the real price. I say almost everyone because we had a older friend years ago who it turns out had been buying her cars at full retail her whole life and never knew you could negotiate. We went with her the next time she needed a new car.Nirmalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14620667876235314509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-60945159036018636522014-11-15T09:47:45.139-06:002014-11-15T09:47:45.139-06:00But we have to realize that they had already done ...<i>But we have to realize that they had already done the deal with S&S by then, in which they agreed to agency pricing</i><br /><br />They said this prior to the S&S deal. They've had agency pricing with DTP authors from the beginning.<br /><br />Amazon was against agency pricing being forced on them through illegal collusion because it took away Amazon's ability to discount.<br /><br />With KDP authors, Amazon retains the ability to discount, and also incentivizes certain prices.<br /><br />One problem with this discussion and debate if that "agency" is automatically assumed to be "no discounting". But that's not the case.<br /><br />Under the wholesale model, publishers also set prices. The MSRP is printed on books. Always has been. Name another product that does that.<br /><br />And until the relatively recent advent of the big box stores and subsequent discounting for large orders, books have always been sold at MSRP.<br /><br />The Big 6 liked discounting. I wrote a blog post about this, how Amazon essentially subsidized publishers by using steep discounts on paper books. Who wouldn't want to sell an item to a retailer for $5 and have the retailer sell it to customers for $4? It's printing money.<br /><br />But when Amazon began dong that with ebooks, publishers were threatened it would destroy their paper oligopoly.<br /><br /><i>It may just be the margin incentives that come from lowering prices below 9.99 at the publisher's option. If so, that's really not what Amazon ever wanted to agree to.</i><br /><br />That's my takeway from this. But in the long game, paper is going to become niche. Then these incentives will indeed force publishers to lower ebook prices. The paper midlist is already shrinking, and the indie list is gobbling up more and more of the market.<br /><br />If publishers intend to survive, they're eventually going to have to lower prices. Amazon incentivizing them to do that will quicken the transition.<br /><br />And if it doesn't? Amazon has 500,000 exclusive titles without the Big 5. They don't need James Patterson to feed Kindle owners new ebooks.<br /><br />In 2010, Amazon needed publishers.<br /><br />I don't think it does anymore, so it cares a lot less about how they price books. Amazon once tried to ensure the very survival of these publishers by discounting their ebooks, which helped readers adopt ebooks and the Kindle. Now all Amazon needs to do is give them enough rope to hang themselves.<br /><br />When the bankruptcies begin, and author backlists are sold to pay creditors, guess who will buy those backlists? Hint: they already bought Dorchester.JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-7083325498249724162014-11-15T09:41:31.710-06:002014-11-15T09:41:31.710-06:00Th deal that S&S signed gives them a minimum a...Th deal that S&S signed gives them a minimum at a certain price. The higher they price, the more they lose.<br /><br />So, if they price at $9.99, they get %70. If they Price at 14.99, they get 35%. Note, those percentages are made up.<br /><br />Amazon has always been OK with Agency pricing. What they were not OK with was the inability to discount the way they wanted to the last time Agency was foisted on them. This time around, they can, and I am eager to see if in fact the higher a trad pub tries selling a book for, the larger the discount Amazon can take.<br /><br />We'll find out in January.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-36827073599289486242014-11-15T09:33:19.028-06:002014-11-15T09:33:19.028-06:00As for "link bait," all blogs are link b...<i>As for "link bait," all blogs are link bait.</i><br /><br />Taking a ridiculous, unsupportable stance that isn't backed up by logic, facts, quotes, links, or citations, is linkbait. Hence your zero comments.<br /><br />You called someone upthread a coward for commenting anonymously.<br /><br />I shredded your ridiculous blog post. You didn't reply to single point I made.<br /><br />Who's the coward?<br /><br />But I honestly do thank you for dropping by. You've certainly helped to stimulate discourse, and it has been polite and even mannered.<br /><br /><i>I'd be offended by this if I weren't staring in the mirror admiring my all consuming masculine beauty.</i><br /><br />I LOLed at this.JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-66404742784879493222014-11-15T08:32:30.818-06:002014-11-15T08:32:30.818-06:00+++ A total narcissist who is never wrong about an...+++ A total narcissist who is never wrong about anything. +++<br /><br />I'd be offended by this if I weren't staring in the mirror admiring my all consuming masculine beauty.<br /><br />+++ Amazon wasn't against agency pricing, Rick. You're conflating agency with the ability to discount. They stated they were fine with agency.<br /><br />This isn't really true +++<br /><br />I will now depart the thread by noting you have verified my observations here and on Hugh Howey's blog. I noted your observations on MY blog and you are named by your handle.<br /><br />You are, however, still not as handsome as I.<br /><br />Best of luck.Rick Chapmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01874000957757021045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-59447825826665377262014-11-15T08:21:56.473-06:002014-11-15T08:21:56.473-06:00Broken Yogi:
Thanks for pointing out the limits of...Broken Yogi:<br />Thanks for pointing out the limits of what I was saying and how I said it. I was trying to make a simple point that Amazon was treating indies roughly similar to how they treat traditional publishers, so it seemed to me that 30% was fair enough for now, contrary to Rick's repeated assertion that it is unfair.<br /><br />But you are correct that they could do more. And it could be brilliant for Amazon to go after luring more of the traditionally published authors to self-publishing with some more of Amazon's 30% share, as well as other beneficial changes to the terms we publish under. As you have pointed out several times on here, that could be the ultimate long term strategy for them.<br /><br />I hope they are listening!<br /><br />Nirmalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14620667876235314509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-30214272284854726042014-11-15T05:23:04.688-06:002014-11-15T05:23:04.688-06:00"You want to pursue this, on my blog. No more..."You want to pursue this, on my blog. No more comments here."<br /><br />Phew.<br /><br />But talk about pitiful transparency...SJArnotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07287030807441734194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-16371587126946530642014-11-15T04:12:56.387-06:002014-11-15T04:12:56.387-06:00Joe,
Amazon wasn't against agency pricing, Ri...Joe,<br /><br /><i>Amazon wasn't against agency pricing, Rick. You're conflating agency with the ability to discount. They stated they were fine with agency.</i><br /><br />This isn't really true. Amazon did say a few weeks before the S&S deal was announced that they were okay with agency pricing, if done in certain unspecified ways. But we have to realize that they had already done the deal with S&S by then, in which they agreed to agency pricing, and were just doing a little spinwork to make it seem like they were okay with agency pricing, so when it came out they could say, "but we were always fine with agency pricing," when it was pretty obvious they weren't. They wanted wholesale pricing, which would mean an almost unlimited ability to discount (limited only by federal trade laws). <br /><br />Now, it would make some sense for Amazon to accept agency pricing, if it meant that most ebook would be priced below 9.99. But that's why this whole conflict started in the first place: publishers didn't like Amazon's deep discounts into the 9.99 and below range, because it threatened their print windowing system, and their control over the industry through that system. That's why the Big Five wanted agency pricing, to stop Amazon from doing that to them. You know, threatening literature and culture, which was always just shorthand for big publishing's control over the industry, as God intended.<br /><br />I can't imagine that S&S would readily agree to an agency pricing model that would essentially allow the same kind of steep discounting and low pricing of ebooks that they wanted to impose agency pricing on Amazon to prevent in the first place. We all know that's what happened back in 2010. They colluded to impose agency pricing to keep ebook prices high. That was the whole point of the agency pricing model. If they were going to allow low prices and steep discounting, why bother with agency pricing at all? What is agency pricing with steep discounts other than wholesale pricing?<br /><br />Now, we still don't know what the "some discounting" in the public announcements of the deal amounts to. It may just be the margin incentives that come from lowering prices below 9.99 at the publisher's option. If so, that's really not what Amazon ever wanted to agree to. But final judgment won't come until we know more. But even you seem to agree that this deal allows publishers to keep ebook prices as high as they want to. So it really doesn't sound like the kind of agency deal Amazon ever would have considered favorable to its interests and goals until very recently. And I think we can read that as pure spin. Broken Yogihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02257804418740860542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-52377209633761379812014-11-15T03:49:14.801-06:002014-11-15T03:49:14.801-06:00Nirmala,
Don't waste your time on Rick. I'...Nirmala,<br /><br />Don't waste your time on Rick. I've made that mistake before, and you won't get anywhere with him. A total narcissist who is never wrong about anything.<br /><br />But I did notice this at the end of your last post:<br /><br /><i>I do not think anyone at Amazon will be listening when they are currently able to get almost every publisher out there to play their game by their rules. </i><br /><br />First, I think it should be clear that Amazon isn't able to get almost every publisher out there to play by their rules. They couldn't get Hachette or S&S to do that, hard as they tried to enforce lower prices or a wholesale model that would give them the continuing ability to offer steep discounts. <br /><br /><i>And especially, why should they give me, as a micro-publisher, a better deal than Hachette and S&S?</i><br /><br />Well, one reason would be to try to steal away authors from those big publishers that they can't currently control. The current terms for self-publishers are certainly better than what we could get in the past, but they still aren't as good as they could be. If Amazon wants to really hurt big publishing, they should go after the authors who are the suppliers of big publishing, and without whom big publishing couldn't even exist. And they could do that by offering better terms and better deals and marketing and working to get print books into stores and so on for self-publishers/micro-publishers (same thing, really). It would probably be money better spent than discounting trad published ebooks anyway.<br /><br />Not saying it's going to happen, but there are definitely sound reasons for it to happen. Broken Yogihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02257804418740860542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-10532877030817592242014-11-15T03:31:24.075-06:002014-11-15T03:31:24.075-06:00Which is similar to the KDP structure. If self-pub...<i>Which is similar to the KDP structure. If self-pubbed authors keep their prices within a certain range ($2.99-$9.99), they get 70%. Outside of that range, they only get 35%.</i><br /><br />The head of S&S said that in their deal, they get a minimum of 70% at all price levels. Which they were already getting anyway. So if we take that 70% as the baseline, there's no punishment at all for pricing about 9.99, while with KDP there's a huge and crushing punishment for stepping out of Amazon's favored pricing range. So if the Hachette deal is similar to S&S's deal, there's no real pressure to price ebooks lower. <br /><br />Whatever incentive there is, comes from some even better margin Amazon must be offering for prices below $10. But there's not much more room left at the top. And what it boils down to, if Amazon is offering significantly higher margins, is essentially the equivalent of a discounting of those books, with Amazon taking most of the hit, but entirey at the discretion of Hachette. And maybe that's all that is meant by "some discounting".<br /><br />Run the numbers. <br /><br />Suppose Hachette prices an ebook at 12.99. With a 70% margin, Hachette makes 9.10 per book, and Amazon makes 3.89. But if Amazon increases the margin to 90% at 9.99, Hachette still makes 9.00, but Amazon only makes 1.00. It is essentially discounting the book, and taking most of the discount out of Amazon's pocket. I'm not sure if Amazon can afford that kind of high margin across the board, but it certainly would create an incentive for lower ebook prices. It ends up being the equivalent of discounting, with Amazon eating most of the pain. That depends on the numbers, the margins, the levels, etc. And who knows, maybe Amazon is willing to forgo profits in order to drive prices down. Maybe not all the way to 90% margins, but since Amazon does tend to think long term, it's not completely impossible that they'd make such offers.<br /><br />On the other hand, publishers would still be free to ignore those deep discounts and higher margins if they wanted to. Which they may very well want to, to protect their print distribution system. But the temptation would be there.<br /><br />But in relation to the negotiations, they could have offered this not just at the start, but regardless of any negotiations at all. It certainly doesn't make sense for Amazon to have held out this long, and end up with something that is essentially a free giveaway to the publishers, who might not even want it. Of course, we don't know what Hachette or Amazon's bargaining positions actually were. But the notion that Amazon essentially made this same offer to Hachette at the start, meaning agency pricing with incentives for lower prices, and Hachette turned them down, is pretty unlikely. It more looks like Amazon just gave up trying to get its way, and is trying to create a situation that simply takes advantage of market forces to do what it's own negotiations could not: drive prices lower. <br /><br /><br /><br />Broken Yogihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02257804418740860542noreply@blogger.com