And so, the Gloves Come Off - Amazon on the Offensive

[Jo Zebedee]

The other thing worth bearing in mind, Psychotick, is we're talking from the perspective of fiction writers.

Non-fiction writers are buggered by Amazon's pricing policy.

To write eg an academic medical book is impossible for 10.00 retail, but the internet closed a lot of academic bookshops by making existing research available online. What happens to new research? Who pays for it if there is no outlet to pay a viable fee for what you produce? And many postgrad researchers rely on their publication credits to support their work. It comes down to individual institutions and without a payback there's no incentive for that.

I'm all for cheap books - I'm a reader. But I'm also aware that people have to be paid for a product. And that includes the book industry. I'm against price fixing, I'm for competition - I'm not for leaving authors the option of taking lesser value for what could be years of work just because Amazon has decided an arbitary policy that it's applied across a spectrum with no regard ( as far as I can see) for the variance of writers out there.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

I hadn't considered academic books - but having said that there are ways around Amazon's pricing policy even for them.

To begin with it only applies to ebooks. Paperback and hardback editions aren't being touched. And most students prefer paper to pixels even in this modern age.

Also, Amazon isn't the only outlet. They could go to smashwords, D2D, Lulu or many others and course requirements can list the site. And lets face it, students are largely trapped when it comes to texts. They have to buy them. I remember one of my micro texts costing me four hundred bucks. I would guess the sales of text books to non students who don't have to buy them, would always have been very low.

As for academic credits for publishing, that's usually related to papers in journals not books. However, most universities have presses and I would assume these days - digital imprints.

And research is paid for by grants and government contracts etc. I'm not aware of any - at least in my fields - that has been paid for by publication of results.

But yeah I agree. I am also against price fixing generally.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I think the key is finding ways to strengthen smashwords etc and reducing Amazon's monopoly. At the moment it holds too much market share - once that opens up then the market should self-regulate to closer to where it should be. But, to me, this policy - and the way they've gone about it, crucially - stinks of bully tactics and is very unpleasant.

 

[Boneman]

I never use Amazon for books, because, as I've said before, I want my local Waterstones to stay open so I can go in and browse all kinds of books, to see what takes my fancy. I simply cannot do that in the same way online. I love a display of interesting books that may contain biographies, romance, travel, cookery, and I can pick up and flick through them. Unless I get a six-foot screen, Amazon can never equal a table full of titles staring at me, with such diversity.

Any monopoly is bad, bad, bad. (Why is there only one Monopolies and Mergers Commission...?) Am I right in thinking this is like the supermarkets when they entered the fray? They said to suppliers: we'll take all your stock, everything you can supply, which was great at first. Margins driven down as soon as the supermarket achieved majority market share, small shops driven out of business, but the customer didn't care that much, because they were getting a good deal, and they weren't informed. (Am I also right in thinking milk farmers get less than 5 pence a gallon these days, and no other market to sell to?)

That's the great thing about the Amazon/Hachette disagreement, it's all being publicised world-wide, and opinion is hardening in both camps, and we can make an informed choice about buying and (for us here, selling) books. The internet can be such a useful tool...

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I think it's exactly like the supermarkets, and look where that's got us.

An example. I need insulation tape to fix a wire in my house. Tesco's (and we have one of the superstores in town) have stopped doing it. The local hardware store closed (because Tesco's took their business) and the nearest place is in one of those ringroad centres you get B&Qs in.

I don't want that happening to books (and it already does, to an extent, given the range they sell, and to magazines), I want to go to my local bookstore. The fact my husband is employed by one comes into that equation, of course, but I'd want it anyway. Five years ago, within 3 miles of Belfast's city centre, I'd have had a choice of three Eason's (like a WH Smith), including a quirky one that sold the sort of books you don't get on the shelf much, three Bargain books, a WH Smith, a Waterstones, an independent and a fantastic academic shop that also specialised in Irish books and had always been a bridge between the two communities through the Troubles and was fairly iconic.

Now we have one Eason's, one Waterstones and the independent left. (There might be a bargain books, too - I haven't been in the relevant shopping centre for a while.) That's it. And I desperately want them to survive, because here's the thing:

Tickety-boo is publishing my book next year. Gary's taken a risk starting a small publisher, I've taken a risk going with a small publisher. We both want it to succeed. I've approached the local bookstores (and I have some contacts, to be fair, but not in all of them.) They've all been supportive. Two have offered launch events. They're prepared to support a local writer.

Amazon don't have that local touch, and they are killing our bookstores. Absolutely killing them - in terms of the stock they can carry (specialist books are order only now, practically everywhere) in terms of footfall. Kindles aren't the enemy - most bookstores sell some form and support electronic files - this isn't about e vs paper, it's about a monopoly that isn't good for writers.

So, like Boneman, irrespective of who is right or wrong, Amazon or Hachette, I'll be voting with my feet. I'm regretting every purchase I've made in Amazon at the moment. I'll be ordering anything else through bookshops (and I can do that online, Waterstone's, Eason's, Smiths, they all have online stores, not to mention Abebooks for the unusual).

And the people hurt by my decision (and I can't be the only one who's looking at this and seeing a monopoly on the product I love) are the self-publishers who rely on Amazon. That's the other reason I'd like to see more competition. I want my mates who've self-pubbed to do well. I want self-pubbing to be strong, because I might want to go there one day. But as long as Amazon call the shots, they're always at risk of a change of policy etc. So, I'll go along to Smashwords and Kobo from now on (if I buy via the electronic route, I rarely do), and won't be using the kindle app at all.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

Tickety-boo is publishing my book next year. Gary's taken a risk starting a small publisher, I've taken a risk going with a small publisher. We both want it to succeed. I've approached the local bookstores (and I have some contacts, to be fair, but not in all of them.) They've all been supportive. Two have offered launch events. They're prepared to support a local writer.

Make sure you do two, three, four times the publicity you need. It's amazing how few people turn up for these kind of events at bookshops. We did one many years ago for a fantasy author whose name temporarily escapes me (Somerset author) and three people turned up. Not good.

 

[ratsy]

I find it hard to believe that Amazon can lose that much money in one year. Wow. I would like to know what percentage of Amazon's sales come from other businesses selling through them? They make so much money on these sales and never even touch the product. I sell product on it, because for this product group, there is no better avenue..oddly enough. They take 12% off the total sale just for being the middle man.

I do buy from Amazon, I will admit it. I don't know if I will stop. I have no good independent stores left that I'm loyal to where I live. The only other option is Chapters/Indigo who is just the lesser of two evils. They are just a more expensive option. So what do I do? I order from amazon, because it's cheap, free to ship and it comes to my door in a couple days. This isn't going to stop.

I saw a post from Brian Mclellan on FB and since you can't preorder his 3rd book on amazon, he is getting people to preorder on his website and they will be signed copies. Well I thought 'sure, that would be cool', so I clicked it to the cart and put in my address....he wanted 25.99 for the book (US dollars) and $30.00 to ship it to me in Canada!!!! So, for this, I will wait until its on Amazon, and pay $18.00 and no freight. If I was independently wealthy, I wouldn't care but I read a lot and buy a lot of hardcovers, so I save where I can.

I think that Amazon gets away with a lot because they have no brick and mortar. Blind warehouses seem to go under the radar somehow but often they seem to lose money. We have a competitor in my work field who had a blind warehouse here in Canada. They did $85 million in sales last year, went under this year, after a $15 million dollar loss!! But as long as Amazon shares are up there, and the CEO's are sitting on expanded wallets, they are probably here to stay.

So, yes, I think Amazon is doing something very stupid and them sending a letter trying to explain metrics to authors is degrading. It's not the authors fault that Amazon needs the money because they added video software to show how a babies bottle works, or whatever...they shouldn't bite the hand that feeds, they should shake it, say thank you and move on.

and that is my 2c

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Make sure you do two, three, four times the publicity you need. It's amazing how few people turn up for these kind of events at bookshops. We did one many years ago for a fantasy author whose name temporarily escapes me (Somerset author) and three people turned up. Not good.

Yeah, I've worked some turkeys and they're horrendous for all concerned. Still, at least I'm savvy enough to know it happens... I think in Belfast I can get a rent-a-crowd. In Derry I might need some help.


Ratsy, well said. I'm lucky I do have an alternative to Amazon. I'm also lucky that in Ireland there is a strong bookstore chain with good presence (the nearest one is about 6 miles from me and they have a branch in most major towns). But I'd hate to lose that, so I'm going to support them more, I think.

 

[Ursa major]

Perhaps the gloves shouldn't have come off, as someone seems to be leaving incriminating fingerprints:

Amazon turned to Orwell for support in its long-running and public clash over ebook terms with the publisher Hachette at the weekend, comparing their battle over ebook pricing ("We want lower ebook prices. Hachette does not") to the fight Penguin had when it introduced cheap paperbacks in the 1930s.

"The famous author George Orwell came out publicly and said about the new paperback format, if 'publishers had any sense, they would combine against them and suppress them'," wrote Amazon in a letter to readers. "Yes, George Orwell was suggesting collusion."

But the full quote from Orwell runs: "The Penguin books are splendid value for sixpence, so splendid that if other publishers had any sense they would combine against them and suppress them." The discrepancy has been pointed out by a host of websites. "It's clear that Orwell is praising the paperback, not arguing for its abolition," wrote TechCrunch. "Only a fool or a businessman would twist that quote so completely. But that's exactly what Amazon did and that's horrible."

Also from that article:

Bill Hamilton, a literary agent at AM Heath and the executor of the Orwell estate, has now written to the New York Times to say that "Amazon is using George Orwell's name in vain".

"It quotes Orwell out of context as supporting a campaign to suppress paperbacks, to give specious authority to its campaign against publishers over ebook pricing; and having gotten as much capital as it can out of waving around Orwell's name, Amazon then dismisses what was an ironic comment without engaging with Orwell's own detailed arguments, which eloquently contradict Amazon's," wrote Hamilton in his letter, calling the move "about as close as one can get to the Ministry of Truth and its doublespeak: turning the facts inside out to get a piece of propaganda across."

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

If you read the quote he was both praising paperbacks and suggesting that for publishers the best thing would be to try an abolish them.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Ursa major]

But saying, in the one hand, that collusion would be a good idea, because paperbacks are bad and, on the other, suggesting that people who would disagree with him about the benefits of paperbacks should do so are two entirely different things. One might be a serious suggestion; the other would not be.

I'm assuming that Orwell said what he did light-heartedly, adding a bit of hyperbole to add to the "joke"; he may have been suggesting that other publishers lacked sense; he may have been suggesting that he expected other publishers to collude. None of these fit in with what Amazon was suggesting he meant, that Orwell was proposing that they ought to collude (because he already had the sense to see that they should).

 

[Jo Zebedee]

To me, he's saying it's such a good idea it'll catch on and the publishers should be worried. But it sounds pretty tongue in cheek, and not personally discouraging of the concept, and certainly not supporting the hyperbole Amazon have used it for.

I hate to say this but the smallest cog in the publishing chain is the writer. We've already heard recently how much income has fallen - who is most vulnerable? And if Amazon can push through one policy, what stops the next and the next?

The net book agreement has ended. Prices can be moved by the retailer but, crucially, the retailer takes the hit for the discounting. (Sure, occasionally publishers work with margin but the bottom line is the guinness book of records at half price or less is done at the expense of the retailers' margin, not the publishers.) that's the way it is in retail - you buy the product and it's up to you how to price it/market it. You can use it to bring bums on seats and get your margin elsewhere, or you can get top margin, and sell less quantity.

Amazon wants to set publishers' terms for them. It wants to set its own prices without taking the hit for that business decision. Where does it go next?

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

Well much as you may want to worry about Amazon, I think I'd worry more about Google books. When you sign an agreement with them to publish, you allow them to reprice your books according to how they want. A lot of authors have complained that their books were abruptly discounted without their knowledge, and that of course has a knock on effect, as Amazon price matches.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Ursa major]

Well much as you may want to worry about Amazon, I think I'd worry more about Google books. When you sign an agreement with them to publish, you allow them to reprice your books according to how they want. A lot of authors have complained that their books were abruptly discounted without their knowledge, and that of course has a knock on effect, as Amazon price matches.

But while we're mentioning Amazon, this webpage includes the following:

“Have you read your Amazon contract?” You know, the boilerplate that you have to sign to be published on Kindle Direct. The boilerplate that Amazon won’t negotiate. The take-it-or-leave it boilerplate they foist on every single one of their authors. Have you read it?
Here’s what it says:

2 Agreement Amendment. The Program will change over time and the terms of this Agreement will need to change over time as well. We reserve the right to change the terms of this Agreement at any time in our sole discretion.

It goes on to say that when Amazon changes the agreement, they don’t have to tell you, all they have to do is make an annotated version of the agreement available somewhere for you to read and agree to. Because disagreeing with the contract means that your books leave the program.
Now the Big Five publishers may be a bunch of ol’ meanies, but you know what? When they sign a contract, it’s law, they can’t change it, and they can be sued if they don’t live up to its terms. They don’t get to say, Hey, we’ll change this stuff whenever we want, and there’s nothing the other party can do about it.

The above applies to Kindle Direct, I believe. (At least, when John Scalzi linked to the above, that's what he said.)

Saying that the Do-No-Evil-(Unless-You're-Lawyered-Up) Company does dubious things doesn't absolve others (whether they're Amazon or traditional publishers). As Scalzi is wont to say, these are all businesses looking after themselves, possibly at the expense of readers or authors or retailers, etc.

But one might suggest that Google and Amazon can behave like this because many of the authors they are dealing are people who are less likely to have agents, may have little experience of publishing and are probably keen to be published. Basically, enough of these imprints' prospective authors will sign up come what may to make this dubious behaviour possible. (And if the big publishers could get away with it, they would; in fact, there has been more than a little fuss about some of these publishers' new ebook imprints, so they have tried this.)

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Something I have found from being agented is that contracting can never be too important. I thought I knew the basics for what to look out for - but I didn't even know the start of it. Amazon and google (and that clause doesn't sound any different from what Amazon do ie adjust the price when they want/need to - the fact they can arbitarily price match means they must have a contract which allows this) aren't in business for the sake of the writer.

I applaud self-publishing for taking the power from the vanity presses and giving writers a chance to get their stuff out there, I just worry how much power they're taking from it.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

Actually I did read the Amaon contract (a long time ago in a galaxy far far away) and I knew about the condition. It hasn't really bothered me. Amazon has tinkered around the edge with the price of my books, but if they discount them it has always been at their own expense. Mostly that clause refers to changes in the contract conditions not the price of the book.

Google on the other hand has been slashing book prices to increase sales and without telling the authors. In fact sometimes the first thing they know is when Amazon sends them an upset email saying "you've reduced the price of your book without telling us and now we're price matching." That of course hurts the author in all sorts of ways. Don't forget the 70% royalty you get from Amazon only applies to books over $2.99. If the the book goes under that the royalty halves to 35%. That can be a nasty shock.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

So the author does take a hit when Amazon reduces the price? It's not just at their expense, but the author's, too, especially if they go below the theshold?

I wonder - does anyone know - if a trad published book is reduced does the same happen? It's a genuine question.

 

[Ursa major]

I'm sure someone -- was it Mark Robson on here? Or Charles Stross on his blog? I'm not sure -- mentioned that when there was, say, a 3-for-2 deal in a book chain, he (or it may have been she) took a hit. But don't quote me on that.

 

[HareBrain]

So the author does take a hit when Amazon reduces the price? It's not just at their expense, but the author's, too, especially if they go below the theshold?

I think there's a difference between when Amazon discounts your book from the list-price you set (which is at their expense) and when they effectively lower your list-price because "you've" lowered it elsewhere (which is at your expense, because it's "your" choice).