7 ms·
Malcolm Gladwell ‘Surprised’ to Become an Amazon Bargaining Chip
- electromagnetic 12y agoI've been seeing a lot of news on this, and most people are crying out against Amazon for hurting authors. However it's their publisher who had the federal government on their back for price fixing. It was their publisher who instigated this. Amazon is a retailer and when 5/6ths of the big publishers conspire to price fix, you can bet every one of them is going to have their necks on the cutting block. Amazon does not need these publishers, they are no longer an online book company they're one of the worlds biggest retailers. These publishers need Amazon, they're a massive retailer known for books. Don't shit where you eat folks.
- balls187 12y agoAmazon has a lot of power because of their distribution, however if people can't get the books they want from Amazon, they'll buy them else where.
- MichaelGG 12y agoPerhaps. Or they'll just download it or ignore it. There's several books I've wanted to read, but they aren't on Kindle and there's so much to read so I just move on. Additionally probably half of my Kindle purchases are impulse purchases, and half of those are done right on the device itself.
- gress 12y agoThe publishers had the federal government on their back because of lobbying from Amazon.
- SoftwareMaven 12y agoIf your suppliers were in collusion with a major competitor, wouldn't you be asking for support from the authorities?
- gress 12y agoA monopolist facing competition from a competent new entrant will use whatever methods are available to keep their position.
- YokoZar 12y agoIt's more correct to describe the collusion of the publishers as a cartel than as a monopolist here. They work together in collusive price-fixing arrangements. Amazon may have just enough market power as a customer of theirs to break this arrangement, however it would be quite a stretch to call Amazon a monopsony.
- revelation 12y agoNah, I think it was because of those charming Steve Jobs emails. I invite anyone to read the original complaint [1] for the details. We've seen this in the no poaching agreements... the dude certainly wrote a lot of emails without consulting his lawyers. 1: http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f282100/282135.pdf http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f282100/282135.pdf
- gress 12y agoWrong - Amazon was behind it: http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/amazons_bogus_anti_apple_crusade/ http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/amazons_bogus_anti_apple_cru...
- revelation 12y agoSure, somebody has to ring the bell. But rest assured, this case was standing on its very own legs. People have this tendency to jump to the "big questions" that the law and judges simply aren't concerned with. There was very clear evidence here, and your opinion of Amazon doesn't factor into it.
- gress 12y agoYour faith in the impartiality of legal processes is most refreshing.
- fpgeek 12y agoGP wasn't making a statement about the impartiality of legal processes [1], they were making a statement about the evidence in this case. If you'd like to dispute that, I'd suggest looking at some of it. [1] In fact, the comment "somebody has to ring the bell" suggests significant awareness of biases in and limitations of legal processes.
- gress 12y agoThe point is that the selection of defendant is what this is all about. Amazon could equally well be subject to an antitrust case.
- IBM 12y agoThe good thing about authors speaking up is that it cuts through the common techie meme that authors and publishers don't have aligned interests. The same is true for other "dinosaur industries" like record labels and artists.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- 6cxs2hd6 12y agoIf I correctly understand you to be saying that record labels and artists have aligned interests? I don't think most artists would agree. Not due to any techie meme. It's a musician "meme", or rather ~50 years of history of labels screwing the vast preponderance of musicians. (Short version: Paying tiny advances, followed by no royalties due to creative accounting of supposed expenses.) It might be the case that a few platinum artists have more in common with their labels. As might a bestselling author like Gladwell with his publisher.
- IBM 12y agoThe poster boy that has been held up by techies for years was Trent Reznor, who went independent in 2007. He's since signed with Columbia Records for An Omen and Hesitation Marks. The next NIN album will be with Interscope. The labels provide him value, as they do for many artists. http://www.spin.com/articles/trent-reznor-david-byrne-major-labels-destroy-angels-radiohead/ http://www.spin.com/articles/trent-reznor-david-byrne-major-...
- nitrogen 12y agoIt seems more likely that he provides enough value to them that they're willing to agree to his terms.
- supergauntlet 12y agoWhy would he sign with them if they provided him no value? Your reply doesn't disprove the point.
- sheetjs 12y agoFor some reason, I just see a blank NYT page: http://i.imgur.com/kX37bFR.png http://i.imgur.com/kX37bFR.png
- freshhawk 12y agoI might not be Gladwell's biggest fan but there is no way he is as confused about this situation as he is pretending to be. Not surprising he wants to stay out of this fight, but I am surprised he took on a naive bumpkin caricature to do so.
- FlailFast 12y agoAgreed. I've always gotten a distinctly "I'm just a simple caveman lawyer" vibe from him, and this response only exacerbates it.* * Great SNL character, btw: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfrozen_Caveman_Lawyer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfrozen_Caveman_Lawyer
- sixQuarks 12y agoThis was a great description of the situation
- ebspelman 12y agoFor those interested in a longer analysis of what Amazon's relationship with publishers looks like, I'd recommend George Packer's article from the New Yorker earlier this year: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2014/02/17/140217fa_fact_packer?currentPage=all http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2014/02/17/140217fa_fact_...
- sixQuarks 12y agoAmazon is not doing a good job when it comes to PR in this case. Jeff Bezos should issue a statement arguing their case
- ryanhuff 12y agoWhat is he going to say? Amazon is letting a business dispute worsen the customer experience. Bezos has said that their job is to make the best customer experience possible, and if they did, that everything else would work itself out. Apparently, this dispute is worth dismissing that vision.
- euank 12y agoAmazon did issue a statement: http://www.amazon.com/forum/kindle/?cdForum=Fx1D7SY3BVSESG&cdThread=Tx1UO5T446WM5YY http://www.amazon.com/forum/kindle/?cdForum=Fx1D7SY3BVSESG&c... "When we negotiate with suppliers, we are doing so on behalf of customers. Negotiating for acceptable terms is an essential business practice that is critical to keeping service and value high for customers in the medium and long term." is the relevant quote for how it's not killing customer experience. The short term customer experience is indeed impacted, but in the long run, I'd rather have more reasonably priced ebooks. Of course, this is Amazon so they're not going to just say "yup, we're doing this out of greed, screw the customer". It's up to you if you believe what they did say or not.
- dsymonds 12y agoIf anything this seems like the customer is the one that is being used as a bargaining chip, not Malcolm Gladwell. There are two companies trying to get their way, refusing to budge, and using whatever tools are at their disposal to try to get the other to acquiesce.
- ghshephard 12y agoOne of the pleasant takeaways from this is this entirely expected economic reaction to Amazon's behavior "Amazon’s competitors are trying to seize the advantage. Walmart.com, for instance, is promoting Hachette titles at 40 percent off, and said Friday that its online book sales had jumped as a result."