5 ms·

Amazon Fires Missile At Book Industry, Launches 70% Kindle Royalty Option

75 points by icey 17y ago

cnunciato 17y ago
Personally I love the idea of authors earning more for their efforts, I think that's great, but there are so many unintended (by consumers, anyway) costs of Amazon using its reach for this kind of thing -- publishers get squeezed, so they produce fewer books, bookstores get squeezed, so more of them close up shop, commerce flows ever more directly to Amazon, choice gets limited... I just don't like it. I buy a ton of stuff from Amazon, but I'm starting to think maybe that's such a great thing anymore, in the long run.
- iron_ball 17y ago
  Your comment was gray when I saw it, so I restored it to >0, but I disagree. This move makes it easier for authors to get their product into readers' hands, gives them a better cut than the publishing industry generally did, and provides better value for the user. Amazon can't cause "less choice," because for one thing, they have effectively unlimited inventory; and for another, if there's an untapped demand, a competitor will arise. Sure, nobody else can publish to Kindle, but the next few generations of smartphones, netbooks, and possibly tablets are very likely to make that a nonissue.
  - petercooper 17y ago
    Sure, nobody else can publish to Kindle That's not true, is it? I'm sure I've seen publishers like Pragmatic Programmers selling Kindle stuff that doesn't go through Amazon. I don't have a Kindle though, so I'm not going to state this with 100% confidence ;-)
    - throw_away 17y ago
      this is true. pp's technical books actually look better on the kindle than amazon's.
    - shawndumas 17y ago
      They do indeed. I have a number of titles in epub format from them.
xcombinator 17y ago
:-D I'm waiting for the Apple tablet info the 27 of January. It seems too much coincidence that Amazon changes her policy now just at the same fees that Apple Apps Store charges. They must know something that we don't and want to be first...
- runevault 17y ago
  There have been rumors/leaks that Apple is making content deals with various forms of publishing including book, which if true this does make more sense.
Mark_B 17y ago
This is a totally exciting and great idea, but the down side the cynic inside of me sees coming is the spam/ads saying "Work from home as an author and make $$$" and junk Kindle-only books flooding Amazon.
- potatolicious 17y ago
  > "and junk Kindle-only books flooding Amazon" I actually think this would be a great idea - so long as it does better than the App Store in terms of filtering for the best. Amazon's recommendation/review system has always been pretty strong, though. Democratization of publishing, of content distribution and production, is one of the chief reasons why the internet has been the most important invention in recent memory.
ShabbyDoo 17y ago
So, am I correct to assume that authors mainly need publishers for printing, distribution, and marketing? Will we see more self-publishing as a result of the Kindle/Nook/etc?
- msg 17y ago
  The main benefit I receive from publishers is filtering. Even the worst publisher printing unbelievable shlock is light years ahead of the garbage in the publishing anteroom, the slush pile. With that, the greatest blog post on publishing of all time, "Slushkiller": http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/004641.html http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/004641.html
  - tjic 17y ago
    > The main benefit I receive from publishers is filtering. The main benefit I receive from my friends is filtering. Now, the question is: do publishers or my friends do that job better?
    - msg 17y ago
      Or a deeper question, are the publishers making your friends' lives easier by doing it first? Do your friends read thousands of self-published books to provide you with recommendations? Or is all their action applied after the mainstream publishers' filter? I'm sure there is self-published stuff out there that is worth my time. Unfortunately, I don't want to read the literary equivalent of MySpace to find it. A good publisher has a quality bar I can trust, and they've taken on the burden of reading unsolicited submissions. And as the blog post says, 75% of it is unreadable crap, 24% is readable but not worth your time, and 1% or less is quality and publishable. That's a lot of hours you and your friends would have wasted.
  - andrewcooke 17y ago
    that's true for me (using publishers as filters) when i'm in a bookstore. but i don't think i've looked at who the publisher of a book is when buying from amazon for ages - typically i read amazon's comments and then google around for what other people are saying.
sjunkin 17y ago
This is brilliant. Anything which streamlines distribution has always helped the consumers and producers while increasing overall efficiency. Redfin is a good example, this looks like it will be another.
- cnunciato 17y ago
  Not always. Redfin, maybe, since the middleman in that case is really more like an obstruction between buyers and sellers. Publishers aren't an obstruction in that sense. Sure, some of them could probably run leaner operations and give more money to their authors, but the publishing industry as a whole serves a very valuable purpose we don't necessarily recognize, because we're so used to it.
  - runevault 17y ago
    Depends, there is some use like content filtration. However the user ratings could fill in for a lot of that on amazon. Also, as came up in another branch of the article's discussion, this could cause certain things like freelance editing to get a real boost from potential increased customers.
greyman 17y ago
The article suggest that the Kindle business is a big money-loser so far? That surprised me. Why it should be a money-loser, when the Kindle itself is rather expensive and the e-book copies cost virtually nothing(?)
- gchucky 17y ago
  There was an article a few months back that stated that Amazon loses $2 for each book sold on Kindle. Publishers won't sell e-books for less than the publishing price. http://www.tbiresearch.com/e-readers-should-drive-profits-for-both-distributors-and-book-publishers-2009-11 http://www.tbiresearch.com/e-readers-should-drive-profits-fo... is the original document, as far as I can find right now.
  - etherael 17y ago
    Is this genuinely a case of "We have commercial control of a lot of physical book manufacturing commodities and in order to leverage the value of these commodities we want to artificially inflate the price of the competition"? That... seems... well, it doesn't taste good, let's put it that way.
j_baker 17y ago
While I sympathize with the Publishers, they're beginning to sound a lot like the RIAA. For capitalism to work, dinosaurs have to die. And it's beginning to look like the publishers are turning into dinosaurs. Personally, if I were to publish a book, I'd be tempted to just cut out the middle man and forego the big advance (which I hear usually isn't that big anyway).

75 points by icey 17y ago

Personally I love the idea of authors earning more for their efforts, I think that's great, but there are so many unintended (by consumers, anyway) costs of Amazon using its reach for this kind of thing -- publishers get squeezed, so they produce fewer books, bookstores get squeezed, so more of them close up shop, commerce flows ever more directly to Amazon, choice gets limited... I just don't like it. I buy a ton of stuff from Amazon, but I'm starting to think maybe that's such a great thing anymore, in the long run.

iron_ball 17y ago
Your comment was gray when I saw it, so I restored it to >0, but I disagree. This move makes it easier for authors to get their product into readers' hands, gives them a better cut than the publishing industry generally did, and provides better value for the user. Amazon can't cause "less choice," because for one thing, they have effectively unlimited inventory; and for another, if there's an untapped demand, a competitor will arise. Sure, nobody else can publish to Kindle, but the next few generations of smartphones, netbooks, and possibly tablets are very likely to make that a nonissue.
- petercooper 17y ago
  Sure, nobody else can publish to Kindle That's not true, is it? I'm sure I've seen publishers like Pragmatic Programmers selling Kindle stuff that doesn't go through Amazon. I don't have a Kindle though, so I'm not going to state this with 100% confidence ;-)
  - throw_away 17y ago
    this is true. pp's technical books actually look better on the kindle than amazon's.
  - shawndumas 17y ago
    They do indeed. I have a number of titles in epub format from them.

xcombinator 17y ago

:-D I'm waiting for the Apple tablet info the 27 of January. It seems too much coincidence that Amazon changes her policy now just at the same fees that Apple Apps Store charges. They must know something that we don't and want to be first...

runevault 17y ago
There have been rumors/leaks that Apple is making content deals with various forms of publishing including book, which if true this does make more sense.

Mark_B 17y ago

This is a totally exciting and great idea, but the down side the cynic inside of me sees coming is the spam/ads saying "Work from home as an author and make $$$" and junk Kindle-only books flooding Amazon.

potatolicious 17y ago
> "and junk Kindle-only books flooding Amazon" I actually think this would be a great idea - so long as it does better than the App Store in terms of filtering for the best. Amazon's recommendation/review system has always been pretty strong, though. Democratization of publishing, of content distribution and production, is one of the chief reasons why the internet has been the most important invention in recent memory.

ShabbyDoo 17y ago

So, am I correct to assume that authors mainly need publishers for printing, distribution, and marketing? Will we see more self-publishing as a result of the Kindle/Nook/etc?

msg 17y ago
The main benefit I receive from publishers is filtering. Even the worst publisher printing unbelievable shlock is light years ahead of the garbage in the publishing anteroom, the slush pile. With that, the greatest blog post on publishing of all time, "Slushkiller": http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/004641.html http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/004641.html
- tjic 17y ago
  > The main benefit I receive from publishers is filtering. The main benefit I receive from my friends is filtering. Now, the question is: do publishers or my friends do that job better?
  - msg 17y ago
    Or a deeper question, are the publishers making your friends' lives easier by doing it first? Do your friends read thousands of self-published books to provide you with recommendations? Or is all their action applied after the mainstream publishers' filter? I'm sure there is self-published stuff out there that is worth my time. Unfortunately, I don't want to read the literary equivalent of MySpace to find it. A good publisher has a quality bar I can trust, and they've taken on the burden of reading unsolicited submissions. And as the blog post says, 75% of it is unreadable crap, 24% is readable but not worth your time, and 1% or less is quality and publishable. That's a lot of hours you and your friends would have wasted.
- andrewcooke 17y ago
  that's true for me (using publishers as filters) when i'm in a bookstore. but i don't think i've looked at who the publisher of a book is when buying from amazon for ages - typically i read amazon's comments and then google around for what other people are saying.

sjunkin 17y ago

This is brilliant. Anything which streamlines distribution has always helped the consumers and producers while increasing overall efficiency. Redfin is a good example, this looks like it will be another.

cnunciato 17y ago
Not always. Redfin, maybe, since the middleman in that case is really more like an obstruction between buyers and sellers. Publishers aren't an obstruction in that sense. Sure, some of them could probably run leaner operations and give more money to their authors, but the publishing industry as a whole serves a very valuable purpose we don't necessarily recognize, because we're so used to it.
- runevault 17y ago
  Depends, there is some use like content filtration. However the user ratings could fill in for a lot of that on amazon. Also, as came up in another branch of the article's discussion, this could cause certain things like freelance editing to get a real boost from potential increased customers.

greyman 17y ago

The article suggest that the Kindle business is a big money-loser so far? That surprised me. Why it should be a money-loser, when the Kindle itself is rather expensive and the e-book copies cost virtually nothing(?)

gchucky 17y ago
There was an article a few months back that stated that Amazon loses $2 for each book sold on Kindle. Publishers won't sell e-books for less than the publishing price. http://www.tbiresearch.com/e-readers-should-drive-profits-for-both-distributors-and-book-publishers-2009-11 http://www.tbiresearch.com/e-readers-should-drive-profits-fo... is the original document, as far as I can find right now.
- etherael 17y ago
  Is this genuinely a case of "We have commercial control of a lot of physical book manufacturing commodities and in order to leverage the value of these commodities we want to artificially inflate the price of the competition"? That... seems... well, it doesn't taste good, let's put it that way.

j_baker 17y ago

While I sympathize with the Publishers, they're beginning to sound a lot like the RIAA. For capitalism to work, dinosaurs have to die. And it's beginning to look like the publishers are turning into dinosaurs. Personally, if I were to publish a book, I'd be tempted to just cut out the middle man and forego the big advance (which I hear usually isn't that big anyway).