5 ms·

As far as I know the Spiegel list, which has a lot of media and book shop presence does not count Amazon. The GfK in German has an exklusive deal with Amazon fo

As far as I know the Spiegel list, which has a lot of media and book shop presence does not count Amazon. The GfK in German has an exklusive deal with Amazon for data, and they do not deliver the Spiegel list data. The Spiegel list also uses an additional voting scheme among their journalists. I have found the Spiegel list a bit weird for years, it contains a lot of highly light reading or polemic stuff like that guy yelling at today’s youth. That it does not include Amazon data explains quite something.

IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago
I just compared the two lists, and there aren't many differences: only one of Amazon's top 10 didn't make it onto the SPIEGEL list ("Homo Deus"). The lists are at https://www.amazon.de/charts/2019-08-11/mostread/nonfiction?ref=chrt_bk_dx_intra_nf_rd https://www.amazon.de/charts/2019-08-11/mostread/nonfiction?... https://www.spiegel.de/kultur/bestseller-buecher-belletristik-sachbuch-auf-spiegel-liste-a-458623.html https://www.spiegel.de/kultur/bestseller-buecher-belletristi... It's all German, obviously. And note that Spiegel has at least two different lists, for hardcover and paperback (plus a few more, less relevant). FWIW I'm surprised by the claim that Spiegel has too much "light-reading" in its bestsellers. The usual charge is that they exclude certain lowbrow titles/categories.
- DanielleMolloy 7y ago
  The Amazon list (20 top items binned across hardcovers, paperbacks and audiobooks, which is correct if your goal is to identify a "zeitgeist trend") and the Spiegel lists (for an unknown reason, separate lists for paperback, hardcover and "Taschenbuch", 60 items in 3 lists [1]) have 11 books in common right now. However if I only look at a single Spiegel list of 20 items, e.g. hardcovers there are only two items left in common. I think you will agree that a book sales data analysis that has not made a successful effort to include one of the biggest book sellers in Germany for years can still safely be called garbage. It is baffling for me how much reputation the Spiegel lists still have. Also, the hardcover Spiegel list has entries like the new book by Spiegel journalist Todenhöfer on rank 10 (rank 2129 on Amazon Germany right now). [1] I ignored the Spiegel audiobooks list because this data is irrelevant without Audible.
  - lispm 7y ago
    Todenhöfer is not a Spiegel journalist. Not at all. DER SPIEGEL gets its book data from der Buchreport which uses sales info from a few hundred actual bookstores. Thus the list is not 'garbage', but a represents what bookstores sell and what is currently trending. The list is also filtered by some criteria, which are listed on the SPIEGEL site.
s9w 7y ago
Also the Spiegel list removes books it doesn't like. https://www.welt.de/kultur/article167043384/Spiegel-verteidigt-Streichung-von-Finis-Germania.html https://www.welt.de/kultur/article167043384/Spiegel-verteidi...
- RandomBookmarks 7y ago
  Please be accurate. Correct would be: They removed a book they consider anti-semitic. That is quite different from what you stated. But great to include the source.
  - mbeex 7y ago
    That's their reasoning. Which doesn't mean at all that he's not right. In case of doubt read the book.
  - zuuow 7y ago
    Both are correct. They removed a book they didn't like because they considered it to be anti-semitic. They are not exclusive.
    - chronial 7y ago
      Both statements are technically correct. One statement clearly transports the facts, the other is massively misleading. The additional use of "books" is further misleading and technically not correct. It is one single book. Is see no reason to defend this spreading of misinformation. Do you?
      - zuuow 7y ago
        I disagree that it's misleading, because the reason is not stated. "Books" may not be correct in this context because it's been a single one thus far, but if another antisemitic book appears, they'd probably delete it too, so I'd argue it sounds more like a norm than a one-off event. By removing a book they didn't like, they opened a can of worms, so to say.
mxfh 7y ago
There is not a single authorative list of bestsellers. Also note that most of those list are supposed to be marketing tools, that can't afford to be too boring or predictable, not a reflections of "raw" sales data. A list of German Language Bestseller lists: https://www.boersenverein.de/de/158283 https://www.boersenverein.de/de/158283
martin_a 7y ago
I think the Spiegel list also does not count total sales but relative sales over a time span, so you can become a "best seller author" with rather low sales numbers, when everybody has sold only few books. Strange system.
- usrusr 7y ago
  So in a month with slow book sales, you'd prefer to see best sellers replaced with least bad sellers? But the term "best" is relative, absolutely!
  - martin_a 7y ago
    Nah, but "best seller author" to me refers to somewhat like "sold 100k copies" and not like "sold better than the others in a bad month". It's just a detail in the end.

IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago

I just compared the two lists, and there aren't many differences: only one of Amazon's top 10 didn't make it onto the SPIEGEL list ("Homo Deus"). The lists are at https://www.amazon.de/charts/2019-08-11/mostread/nonfiction?ref=chrt_bk_dx_intra_nf_rd https://www.amazon.de/charts/2019-08-11/mostread/nonfiction?... https://www.spiegel.de/kultur/bestseller-buecher-belletristik-sachbuch-auf-spiegel-liste-a-458623.html https://www.spiegel.de/kultur/bestseller-buecher-belletristi... It's all German, obviously. And note that Spiegel has at least two different lists, for hardcover and paperback (plus a few more, less relevant). FWIW I'm surprised by the claim that Spiegel has too much "light-reading" in its bestsellers. The usual charge is that they exclude certain lowbrow titles/categories.

DanielleMolloy 7y ago
The Amazon list (20 top items binned across hardcovers, paperbacks and audiobooks, which is correct if your goal is to identify a "zeitgeist trend") and the Spiegel lists (for an unknown reason, separate lists for paperback, hardcover and "Taschenbuch", 60 items in 3 lists [1]) have 11 books in common right now. However if I only look at a single Spiegel list of 20 items, e.g. hardcovers there are only two items left in common. I think you will agree that a book sales data analysis that has not made a successful effort to include one of the biggest book sellers in Germany for years can still safely be called garbage. It is baffling for me how much reputation the Spiegel lists still have. Also, the hardcover Spiegel list has entries like the new book by Spiegel journalist Todenhöfer on rank 10 (rank 2129 on Amazon Germany right now). [1] I ignored the Spiegel audiobooks list because this data is irrelevant without Audible.
- lispm 7y ago
  Todenhöfer is not a Spiegel journalist. Not at all. DER SPIEGEL gets its book data from der Buchreport which uses sales info from a few hundred actual bookstores. Thus the list is not 'garbage', but a represents what bookstores sell and what is currently trending. The list is also filtered by some criteria, which are listed on the SPIEGEL site.

s9w 7y ago

Also the Spiegel list removes books it doesn't like. https://www.welt.de/kultur/article167043384/Spiegel-verteidigt-Streichung-von-Finis-Germania.html https://www.welt.de/kultur/article167043384/Spiegel-verteidi...

RandomBookmarks 7y ago
Please be accurate. Correct would be: They removed a book they consider anti-semitic. That is quite different from what you stated. But great to include the source.
- mbeex 7y ago
  That's their reasoning. Which doesn't mean at all that he's not right. In case of doubt read the book.
- zuuow 7y ago
  Both are correct. They removed a book they didn't like because they considered it to be anti-semitic. They are not exclusive.
  - chronial 7y ago
    Both statements are technically correct. One statement clearly transports the facts, the other is massively misleading. The additional use of "books" is further misleading and technically not correct. It is one single book. Is see no reason to defend this spreading of misinformation. Do you?
    - zuuow 7y ago
      I disagree that it's misleading, because the reason is not stated. "Books" may not be correct in this context because it's been a single one thus far, but if another antisemitic book appears, they'd probably delete it too, so I'd argue it sounds more like a norm than a one-off event. By removing a book they didn't like, they opened a can of worms, so to say.

mxfh 7y ago

There is not a single authorative list of bestsellers. Also note that most of those list are supposed to be marketing tools, that can't afford to be too boring or predictable, not a reflections of "raw" sales data. A list of German Language Bestseller lists: https://www.boersenverein.de/de/158283 https://www.boersenverein.de/de/158283

martin_a 7y ago

I think the Spiegel list also does not count total sales but relative sales over a time span, so you can become a "best seller author" with rather low sales numbers, when everybody has sold only few books. Strange system.

usrusr 7y ago
So in a month with slow book sales, you'd prefer to see best sellers replaced with least bad sellers? But the term "best" is relative, absolutely!
- martin_a 7y ago
  Nah, but "best seller author" to me refers to somewhat like "sold 100k copies" and not like "sold better than the others in a bad month". It's just a detail in the end.