# Mark Coker at HuffPo: Amazon Aims to Empty Competitor Shelves of Indie Ebooks



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-coker/amazon-ebooks-kdp-select_b_1139260.html

"How should indie authors respond to Amazon's KDP Select program? Horror might be a good start. It's in every author's best interest to support the development of a vibrant and competitive global ebook retailing ecosystem. With the democratized distribution enabled by indie ebooks, authors should distribute their books to as many retailers as possible. A world of many ebook retailers, all working to connect readers with books, is much preferable to a world where a single retailer restricts access to books."


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

If I were Mark Coker, I'd be like this right now. Just substitute "Mark Coker" where you hear "Wayne Brady."

NSFW






Seriously though, the lending library REALLY REALLY sucks for him. Whether you think the LL is a good thing or not (for you), I think it's terrible that he has to deal with probably more than ten thousand authors requesting that SW remove their books from Kobo and Sony. Hopefully this will led to some changes at SW that will be good for them and make things easier for them in the future.


----------



## James Conway (Jul 7, 2011)

Hey! They can't do that, I just got to the party. What is the likelihood that they will succeed?


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

Look on the positive side. The more people who pull their books from Sony, B&N and the like - the more visibility the rest of us will have!


----------



## Guest (Dec 9, 2011)

I'm laughing at the "Impact on Competing Retailers" part.



> Impact on competing retailers:
> 
> Harms other retailers by denying them the ability to sell the author's book.
> Many authors will permanently stop distributing to Amazon's competitors once they become fully dependent upon Amazon for the lion's share of their earnings.
> ...


This sounds like a win-win-win-win for Amazon! 

And, at this point, the prospect of Amazon having a monopoly on bookselling is ridiculous beyond comprehension.


----------



## Guest (Dec 9, 2011)

foreverjuly said:


> And, at this point, the prospect of Amazon having a monopoly on bookselling is ridiculous beyond comprehension.


Why? They are already paying customers to use stores as a showroom, but then buy from them. And while this little app is not for books...yet...how long until it is? This actually turns my stomach a bit. It's one thing for a store to say "We will match any competitor's ad." It is another to say, "go shop in our competitor's shop, get assistance from their employees on how the item works, sample the product, and then we'll give you a 5% off discount to buy it from us." THAT is predatory. And that should concern a lot of people.


----------



## Guest (Dec 9, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Why? They are already paying customers to use stores as a showroom, but then buy from them. And while this little app is not for books...yet...how long until it is? This actually turns my stomach a bit. It's one thing for a store to say "We will match any competitor's ad." It is another to say, "go shop in our competitor's shop, get assistance from their employees on how the item works, sample the product, and then we'll give you a 5% off discount to buy it from us." THAT is predatory. And that should concern a lot of people.


Julie, that's completely different from having a monopoly on bookselling.


----------



## Guest (Dec 9, 2011)

foreverjuly said:


> *****, that's completely different from having a monopoly on bookselling.


You don't see these steps as a means to just that? Destroy inventories at competitors. Encourage customers to use the resources of brick and mortar stores but to buy from Amazon instead. Sell below cost in order to drive down prices to the point where competitors can't make a profit. These are the steps one takes to create a monopoly.


----------



## Guest (Dec 9, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> You don't see these steps as a means to just that? Destroy inventories at competitors. Encourage customers to use the resources of brick and mortar stores but to buy from Amazon instead. Sell below cost in order to drive down prices to the point where competitors can't make a profit. These are the steps one takes to create a monopoly.


Yes, doing the thing with the price checking enters into an area that some people will find morally offensive. I wouldn't do it. But guess what? Companies in the same field compete against each other. The thing that's hard to realize is how hard it is to prove predatory pricing, because companies are welcome to take losses on anything they want, but to do it to aim specifically and put another company out of business isn't so clear cut, even if another business is driven under. (Sort of like how hard it is to indict Wall Streeters for selling mortgage-backed derivatives while betting against them).

And that's different from having a monopoly on bookselling, which I explained to Moses earlier is virtually impossible. The scope of booksellers in the country is so much wider than people realize. It's not Amazon, BN, Apple, and a few others, it's absolutely every place that sells a book. That means every single grocery store, every single drug store, gas stations, newsstands, those places in the airports, WAL-MART, every other store like them, actual independent booksellers, absolutely anywhere that you can get a book, even if it has nothing to do with what the company as a whole is about. Taken as a whole, Amazon's place in the book industry is still extremely limited, and that's what a judge would decide if it ever got there.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_" These are the steps one takes to create a monopoly."_

What firm has taken those steps and successfully created a retail monopoly?


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

An article about what's bad for writers written for Huffington Post. Irony: UR doing it right.


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD!

I mean Amazon.

You know who are scary? People with nothing to lose. I've got almost zero sales. I have nothing to lose by cuddling up to Hypnotoad. I mean Amazon.


----------



## Kevis Hendrickson (Feb 28, 2009)

genevieveaclark said:


> I'd probably be more sympathetic to Coker if Smashwords did a better job of distributing books...Coker...should provide a truly competitive service.


I dig Smashwords and all. But maybe if the books published on Smashwords looked and read as good as the ones on Kindle there'd be less authors bailing on him. Smashwords has been around for years and we still can't upload a book over 5 MB. That's pathetic by itself. Once you add the painfully long process of books being distributed to sites like Sony and Kobo, I wonder if Coker's energy couldn't be put to better use. It's a free market. Instead of railing about greedy ol' Amazon, how about improving the process of publishing books on Smashwords? In other words, give us an incentive not to go exclusive.


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

I'm not sorry Amazon is attracting authors to go exclusive with them. I'm not sorry thousands of authors are pulling out of Smashwords, iTunes and B&N.

If the competition wants to stay afloat, they're going to have to come up with something to attract some authors. If *I* were in charge of Smashwords, (or insert other ebook seller) I would launch a strategic program to get authors to come back, starting with NOT forcing them to be exclusive. That would make it easier for big sellers to participate. Then, I would find a way to entice those with QUALITY books to come over. (That would make it so most of the books left in the lending library were crappy.) I would hire a few college kids to go in search of the good books. Have them read samples and look on forums like this one. Have them start with best seller lists on Amazon. Have them turn in a list of great books that I could promote the heck out of on my website.

If Smashwords (or someone else) contacted me and said they would like to feature me for a few days if only I would leave the lending library at the next possible term, I would do it if I thought I could get sales because of it. Heck, B&N has some great sales records for those whose books you can FIND.

The more quality books you have, the more people are going to shop with you. Doesn't matter that Amazon just enticed 30,000 authors to go exclusive if most of the books are written like a two-year-old wrote them.

That's what the competition needs to do. Focus on quality, not quantity.

Vicki


----------



## Guest (Dec 9, 2011)

Vicki, the problem with that is Smashwords has never made attracting quality a priority. It operates under the "I still make a million dollars if one million books make 1 dollar" strategy.


----------



## Nathan Lowell (Dec 11, 2010)

Victorine said:


> I'm not sorry Amazon is attracting authors to go exclusive with them. I'm not sorry thousands of authors are pulling out of Smashwords, iTunes and B&N.
> 
> If the competition wants to stay afloat, they're going to have to come up with something to attract some authors. If *I* were in charge of Smashwords, (or insert other ebook seller) I would launch a strategic program to get authors to come back, starting with NOT forcing them to be exclusive. That would make it easier for big sellers to participate. Then, I would find a way to entice those with QUALITY books to come over. (That would make it so most of the books left in the lending library were crappy.) I would hire a few college kids to go in search of the good books. Have them read samples and look on forums like this one. Have them start with best seller lists on Amazon. Have them turn in a list of great books that I could promote the heck out of on my website.
> 
> ...


This. Oh, my goodness, this.

I'm in the program with my self-pub because _there isn't an alternative anywhere!_

Smashwords barfs on multiple paragraph styles? The meat grinder of a conversion tool has had problems for years.

B&N feels that as a catalog, they're doing wonderful for the people who put links to their books on their webpages but does nothing to help customers find books.

Apple? You need to own a Macintosh to play? Seriously?

I'd love to work with somebody who'd actually -- you know -- do stuff to help me. Right now, that's the 8million pound gorilla in the room and I'm gonna keep peeling bananas because that's the only game in town.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Victorine said:


> I'm not sorry Amazon is attracting authors to go exclusive with them. I'm not sorry thousands of authors are pulling out of Smashwords, iTunes and B&N.


I agree that those companies need to do much better in order to keep indie authors happy. But when it comes to SW, think of the resources that company has vs. what Amazon has to spend. We're talking about King Kong vs. a fly. This LL move, with its exclusivity, is going to be a major headache for SW to deal with and it's going to cost SW a ton of money, too. I won't be surprised if this deal essentially kills SW, though I don't expect SW to go down tomorrow (and I have to admit, I don't know what their finances are like).

And as frustrating as SW can be (I know first hand), they've still done a lot of good for a lot of us. They let people get into iBooks without owning Macs. They let people get free books into many different stores. They have the coupon option. They make ISBNs cheap. They let us set long previews. They make many different types of electronic files (epubs, pdfs, etc.). They deserve a little sympathy, if not our thanks and support. They're far from perfect, but out of the major players they're pretty much "indie" themselves.

This is definitely a case of the 1,000 pound gorilla smashing its hairy fist against the faces of its competitors, and one of them is a small operation compared to the rest. I hate that.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

I submitted this to the comments (in parts) but it's not there. Fwiw...

Mark,

I understand where you're coming from and I don't blame you for being angry and uncertain what this new program will mean for you and your authors. I can't imagine what your inbox is going to look like in the coming weeks as authors panic about not being able to opt-out of your expanded distribution channels. 

I do want to present this all from one indie's point of view. I'm just your average indie. I do fairly well with my two self-published books and up until yesterday, they were available on Smashwords, Barnes & Noble and several other sites. I'm taking a chance on Amazon's Select program. I'm not being forced into it. I've thought long and hard about the advantages and disadvantages and in the end decided to give it a shot. Here's why:

(I'm going to leave the agency pricing issue to others.)

1. My sales at other retailers are miniscule, so I won't be losing valuable sales rank by suspending sales for 3 months while I test the waters.

2. 3 months isn't forever. Since I've gained so little ground on other sites, I can afford to try this as an experiment. I hate the exclusivity part of the deal, but I also understand why they've done it. 3 months will fly by. Hopefully. If it doesn't work for me, I'll opt-out (which really isn't hard). For the record, I also don't see anyone could accidentally opt-in either. The dashboard is pretty clear.

3. Additional exposure. While it remains to be seen what the increased visibility of Select participation will mean to sales and borrows, it's worth a shot. The ability to offer my book for free and most importantly, put it back in the paid ranks quickly is definitely a benefit and gives me added exposure. Will it be as useful a tool as it once was? Doubtful. But I do think it's still one of the most powerful marketing tools a lowly indie has. My books will also be discoverable in new ways, by new people thanks to Select. And discoverability is one of the areas that makes Amazon king of jungle.

Other sites (Smashwords, Barnes & Noble, iTunes, etc) do not make it easy for users to find what they want. The search and browse functions are, frankly, terrible. As far as I can tell Barnes and Noble doesn't even think people use their search engine. Amazon is by far the leader in giving books a chance to be found. For an indie with no track record, that's the holy grail. If no one can find me on Barnes & Noble unless they're specifically looking for me, growth can't happen.

Do I think this Amazon Select is going to be a boon? No. Do I owe it to myself (knowing my personal situation) to give it a shot? Yes. Is it for everyone? Hardly. I know many indies who are not going to participate because they've decided it's not in their best interest. 

And that's the thing. Amazon isn't making us do this. Most indies I know are level-headed people. It's a business decision. I don't feel obligated to do it. I'm taking a flyer. If I had decent sales elsewhere I wouldn't. I'm sure most authors can take stock of their situation and make a decision about what's best for them and their careers.

Now, this might be a bust. I might regret it. That's one of the great things about being an indie, I can make my own mistakes. 

I'm well aware that I'm just another chess piece to Amazon in their war for dominance.  Mongo only a pawn in game of life. The recent deals with Marvel, DC and Conde Nast have shown that this war is just beginning. Indies are another hill to fight for. But I can't imagine any one retailer cornering the market on indies. It's like herding cats. No two of us have the same needs or are in the same place. 

Does it scare me to sell my soul to the company store? Hell yeah. But as long as the other "stores" don't see me as a valuable commodity (how's that for a mixed metaphor!), I'm willing to take the risk.

For now.


----------



## Benjamin A. (Oct 1, 2011)

Nathan Lowell said:


> This. Oh, my goodness, this.
> 
> I'm in the program with my self-pub because _there isn't an alternative anywhere!_
> 
> ...


I agree with some of the things you say, especially that final bit. All the self-publishing services gladly offer a venue for sales, but it stops there. I'm amazed one of the big ebook retailers, or even one of the lesser known ones, hasn't decided to go for a next step in helping those who publish books with them. Think of all the possible huge hits that are skulking around in stores written by independent authors. Think of how many could have been uploaded just today. I'm not saying the logistics would be easy, but you could even start with something like someone else suggested, and have some college kids dig through and check them out. I've advocated on my own blog that e-retailers team up with book blogs on the web and in print to check stuff out. I'm sure a system and agreement between authors, e-retailers, and reviewers could be reached, keeping it honest could be difficult, but if each book was seen by more than one reviewer, it may increase the merit.

Either way, I think there's more sleeper hits out there right now than anyone can really know. All e-retailers could be making more if they created a system to check out this indie revolution and push it along instead of just take whatever comes.


----------



## Mr. Coffee Snob (Jun 27, 2011)

I predict everything will be fine. Smashwords will survive, leaner and meaner.

#1: Many writers will fail to use the promotional tools of Select wisely and will end up returning to Smashwords. 
#2: Books that are selling on Smashwords will remain on Smashwords, while books that aren't selling on Smashwords won't matter so much.
#3: Many writers will want projects distributed through Smashwords so they can reach new readers.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Nathan Lowell said:


> B&N feels that as a catalog, they're doing wonderful for the people who put links to their books on their webpages but does nothing to help customers find books.


Don't forget that Barnes and Noble requires a US bank account and US tax ID and US credit card to play, basically making it impossible for Non-American authors to upload their books to them. I have two of the three and still can't play.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Nathan Lowell said:


> I'd love to work with somebody who'd actually -- you know -- do stuff to help me. Right now, that's the 8million pound gorilla in the room and I'm gonna keep peeling bananas because that's the only game in town.


This. If only there was an already existent internet company with a huge subscriber base and well-developed search and recommendation algorithms plus the requisite experience of providing consumers with digital media on a panoply of mobile devices. You know, like a electronic distributor of movie flicks or something.



Robert E. Keller said:


> I predict everything will be fine. Smashwords will survive, leaner and meaner.
> 
> #1: Many writers will fail to use the promotional tools of Select wisely and will end up returning to Smashwords.
> #2: Books that are selling on Smashwords will remain on Smashwords, while books that aren't selling on Smashwords won't matter so much.
> #3: Many writers will want projects distributed through Smashwords so they can reach new readers.


I hope so...but it will depend on the state of Smashwords' books. Here's praying that Mark didn't take out a bunch of loans for future improvements based on his 12/6/11 cash flow projections.

B.


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> Vicki, the problem with that is Smashwords has never made attracting quality a priority. It operates under the "I still make a million dollars if one million books make 1 dollar" strategy.


True. But now would be a *great* time to switch. I mean, the books that all pulled out are the ones that aren't making any money. Why not trim the fat? I pulled off one of my books, but not my best seller. Amazon was able to push my book and sold over 100,000 copies. Why couldn't Smashwords push it? (Yeah, they wouldn't sell 100,000 copies, but they DO have shoppers who go browse over there.) Push the books that buyers would *want* to buy. From what I can tell, all they push are the newly uploaded ones.

Even if I earned $100 a month from Smashwords, and earned $1,000 from Amazon, I still would have to really think hard before ditching that $100 a month and going exclusive.

And Smashwords has an upper hand because they do offer so many formats. It's just hard to find quality content.

Vicki


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Why? They are already paying customers to use stores as a showroom, but then buy from them. And while this little app is not for books...yet...how long until it is? This actually turns my stomach a bit. It's one thing for a store to say "We will match any competitor's ad." It is another to say, "go shop in our competitor's shop, get assistance from their employees on how the item works, sample the product, and then we'll give you a 5% off discount to buy it from us." THAT is predatory. And that should concern a lot of people.


The Australian retail sector will go crazy if they get a whiff of that. They have trouble enough understanding that Australian shoppers _will_ buy their goods online if the price is right.


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

shelleyo1 said:


> An article about what's bad for writers written for Huffington Post. Irony: UR doing it right.


Ariana loves writers, as long as they work for free.


----------



## ETS PRESS (Nov 4, 2011)

Kevis 'The Berserker' Hendrickson said:


> I dig Smashwords and all. But maybe if the books published on Smashwords looked and read as good as the ones on Kindle there'd be less authors bailing on him. Smashwords has been around for years and we still can't upload a book over 5 MB. That's pathetic by itself. Once you add the painfully long process of books being distributed to sites like Sony and Kobo, I wonder if Coker's energy couldn't be put to better use. It's a free market. Instead of railing about greedy ol' Amazon, how about improving the process of publishing books on Smashwords? In other words, give us an incentive not to go exclusive.


THIS.
It's a free economy. It's called competition. Amazon's competition needs to stop whining and step up to the plate.


----------



## John Blackport (Jul 18, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _" These are the steps one takes to create a monopoly."_
> 
> What firm has taken those steps and successfully created a retail monopoly?


Home Depot?


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

I agree that the competition needs to step up its game. B&N needs to give Pubit authors a "free" tool with no strings attached. Think how cool that would be, especially if Amazon's bots saw the price and price-matched on Amazon. Who needs the lending library then? And B&N needs Nook Daily Deals. How about one for each genre, and several Pubit Daily Deals each day also? Maybe they change their terms and give 65% to $1.99 and up books, opening up a new pricing niche. And above all, they need to improve their algorithms. 

Apple needs to lose the Mac requirement for uploading. I think they may have a corporate culture that's still coasting along on Steve Jobs disdain for ebooks, though, and they may be content to just make whatever they make on bestsellers. 

Kobo needs to let us upload directly so we have control. And they need to not drop our prices unless they are price-matching. 

Smashwords may have a dim future. I see little reason to use them if I can upload directly to the other retail outlets. Books that don't have steady sales on Smashwords become invisible. You will never find them unless you search for them directly.  The only reason now to use Smashwords is to get access to Apple, Kobo, and other platforms and to use their coupons to give away books. What Mark Coker needs to do is figure out how to make books sell on Smashwords itself so it's a viable platform for sales instead of just being a middleman.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Home Depot?"_

They have very good market share of home improvement and hardware, and I think they are the biggest home improvement firm. But everything they sell is readily available at many other stores. Lowes alone disqualifies HD from being a monopoly.


----------



## Sam Rivers (May 22, 2011)

> It's a free economy. It's called competition. Amazon's competition needs to stop whining and step up to the plate.


Barnes & Noble could make a small change that could have a big impact. Suppose they let you make any book free for as long as you wanted? And they put in a simple tool so you could easily change it from paid to free.

Barnes & Noble needs to think outside the box like Amazon is doing.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

John Blackport said:


> Home Depot?


Huh. I wonder how the heck I just bought that new washer from Lowes.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

I share the sentiments of those who have pointed out how poor the alternatives are. Smashwords is the only alternative to Amazon that is at least trying to do something to help indies get noticed.  But they are doing it via distribution.  I don't think of Smashwords as a retailer - they have made a conscious choice to focus on distribution and essentially ignore their buying interface. As a distributor, I do really appreciate them.

But the places they're distributing to have NOT chosen to create a customer-focused buying experience like Amazon has. It's really that simple. I am only going to enroll one book, a shorts collection, in Amazon Select. At least at first.  But I gotta be honest - I don't see any of Smashwords' partners showing any sign that they plan to work towards being a viable competitor for Amazon as far as indie books go. So even though I like Smashwords and want to support Mark, my support is going towards something that is destined to fail unless Smashwords' partners change their tune.  It's difficult enough to make a business decision based on loyalty, but making one based on loyalty to something that probably will not wind up providing the diversity of outlets we need. . .

B&N has decided to stay in bed with tradpub.  Apple-maybe for the same reason or maybe for others-has chosen not to make their store as good as it could be. (Note - Apple is the most likely one out there to up the ante for indies. I predict they'll do *something* in 2012 to try to change the dynamic, but whether it will wind up helping indies is anyone's guess). Kobo distribution has been a trainwreck, and their search has sucked. Smashwords has consciously chosen a least common denominator by not allowing direct epub uploads. They've all made decisions that are negatives for my business. I have no resentment against any of them, but neither should I fret much about doing something that will impact their businesses in a negative manner.


----------



## David Wisehart (Mar 2, 2010)

If another distributor wants indies to join them, they've got to do better than Amazon.

That's how Smashwords grew. It offered something that indie authors wanted but Amazon didn't offer.

If Amazon becomes an evil empire, indies can and will jump ship.

Amazon isn't locking us into long-term contracts (like some others in the publishing industry).

Mark should focus on becoming a winner, not a whiner.

David


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Asher MacDonald said:


> Kobo needs to let us upload directly so we have control. And they need to not drop our prices unless they are price-matching.


You can upload directly to Kobo now, if you request a copy of their publisher's agreement and agree to the terms.


----------



## Zelah Meyer (Jun 15, 2011)

Does Kobo let non US authors do that too or are they like B&N who only let Americans go direct?

Edited to add: I checked their website to see if they answered my question above (they don't - so I'd still be interested to hear from any non-US authors who are going direct so that I know if it's possible!) - interestingly, they do allow you to make your book free: http://www.kobobooks.com/companyinfo/authorsnpublishers.html


----------



## Kent Kelly (Feb 12, 2011)

I have no emotional attachment to any of the businesses involved in indie ebook publishing/distribution.  Anybody who wants to compete with Amazon is going to have to pony up and provide us with better incentives.  They need to recognize our value, as a commodity if nothing else, and provide financial reasons why we should not partner exclusively with Amazon.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

modwitch said:


> I'd settle even for decent mechanisms for discoverability and easy uploads.
> 
> I'm happy to give my business to any entities that give me assistance in selling my books. SW was a no-go for me because of formatting restrictions, but it has offered a valuable service to many authors. And now the landscape has changed, and SW, just like everyone else, will need to reposition, and figure out how to continue to add value.
> 
> ...


Agreed. Make us a better offer instead of listing your complaints.


----------



## Ian Fraser (Mar 8, 2011)

People talk about 'competition' as if any real competition remains once a large monopoly is through playing vampire on the local infrastructure. Look at how many mom n pop stores survive the ravages of a Walmart in towns across America...There are documentaries, good ones, showing what happens when greedy companies move in and attempt to control the horizontal and the vertical. 

You might call it 'just capitalism' but that's like calling a rape survivor an 'inadvertent sperm recipient.' It disguises the damage done and the brutality of the act and the repercussions. 'Capitalism' is not always either 'a good thing' or a useful go-to defense when a company is trying to make those who sell through it, strip out their products from competitor's stores. 

I look at that big money figure sitting on the web page and see a dangling carrot for the greedy and short-sighted, much as I see 'lotteries' as being for people who can't do mathematics. 

Putting all your sellable eggs in one basket and defending a company that's trying to entice you into doing this, is ludicrous.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Ian Fraser said:


> People talk about 'competition' as if any real competition remains once a large monopoly is through playing vampire on the local infrastructure. Look at how many mom n pop stores survive the ravages of a Walmart in towns across America...There are documentaries, good ones, showing what happens when greedy companies move in and attempt to control the horizontal and the vertical.
> 
> You might call it 'just capitalism' but that's like calling a rape survivor an 'inadvertent sperm recipient.' It disguises the damage done and the brutality of the act and the repercussions. 'Capitalism' is not always either 'a good thing' or a useful go-to defense when a company is trying to make those who sell through it, strip out their products from competitor's stores.
> 
> ...


Have you read any of the posts on this thread? Read Modwitches, 2 above this one. There is no distributor /bookstore that gives authors the visiblity Amazon does. Take your books off Amazon, sell, them elsewhere and see how it goes. Smashwords is the only one doing what it does too.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Ian Fraser said:


> You might call it 'just capitalism' but that's like calling a rape survivor an 'inadvertent sperm recipient.'


Wow. Just a bit too far, maybe?

Between this and the Irish Potato Famine reference . . . I think we're about 3 seconds from someone shouting "Hitler."


----------



## yomamma (Feb 10, 2011)

I have to admit, I kind of rolled my eyes at the response. Who didn't see that coming? That being said, I wouldn't mind if Smashwords upped their game. There has to be a better converter than the meatgrinder, and their catalog needs to be better to shop through. Your move, Smashwords!


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Yeah, the best response Coker can have isn't to complain about this but to get busy and talk to the vendors and figure out how to get the books to sell better. Few will remove books from Smashwords (and Apple, Kobo, B&N) if those markets represent significant sales.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Robert E. Keller said:


> I predict everything will be fine. Smashwords will survive, leaner and meaner.
> 
> #1: Many writers will fail to use the promotional tools of Select wisely and will end up returning to Smashwords.
> #2: Books that are selling on Smashwords will remain on Smashwords, while books that aren't selling on Smashwords won't matter so much.
> #3: Many writers will want projects distributed through Smashwords so they can reach new readers.


Very good response, Robert. I agree; the ones pulling books from Smashwords have probably never made a sale there (or very few). Once a few people feel like they've been screwed (as per item #1), they'll work toward getting back to SW. I'm #2 and #3--the $20 or so I'd get from the lending program won't match what I get from SW or PubIt. And, regardless, it's not just about the money. I have several dedicated fans who own Nooks and buy from iBooks. The last thing I will do is alienate some of my fans for the express purpose of a (remote) chance of making a few extra bucks; if I'm going to alienate my fans, it will be by killing off a beloved character or having the bad guy win or something.


----------



## Benjamin A. (Oct 1, 2011)

The problem is epublishers just haven't decided to care yet. Currently the market is running with the idea that indie authors are just a kind of filler, that trad. pubs should still be the main course. Sure, some indies are doing great, and at least they've been recognized for it instead of still being treated like the rest of us. Still though, just like movies and other art forms, people seem to feel they need to know if came from some well known commercial source to decide value.

That being said, I don't care who does what, as long as it helps me sell books. I was thinking of joining KDP Select, but I'm unsure if it would help me, with one book no one seems to know of yet, and each person only getting one rental a month. If Amazon does keep heading in a direction that changes the publishing industry, I salute them, even if it doesn't help me yet. As others have said, more discoverability and helping new authors to find audiences are what they are all missing right now. It amazes me, since most of the chance-taking dangers have been elimated by digital downloading instead of producing physical coopies.

Lord knows if I owned a bookstore, particularly one with as much power as Amazon, I'd be focusing on the cheap yet great reads that come from the indie author community, and make people feel like they were crazy for ever buying a book for like 9.99, when they could have had 3-4 or even more.

That's just me though.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

I think there is a way to use the lending library and still use Smashwords and other vendors. Put it on Amazon first for three months and take advantage of the free tool and then put it up at other places. 

You can also take just one book and put it up and use it as a way to advertise your other books that are on other vendors. 

It doesn't have to be all in with Amazon. You can be partially in or temporarily in. 

Anyway, let's hope that Smashwords and other vendors respond to this move by Amazon by giving us some promotional tools to use.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

shelleyo1 said:


> Wow. Just a bit too far, maybe?
> 
> Between this and the Irish Potato Famine reference . . . I think we're about 3 seconds from someone shouting "Hitler."


The Nazis did try to monopolize European territory, and look what that got us... (just kidding, just kidding, everyone calm down and relax.)


----------



## John Blackport (Jul 18, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Lowes alone disqualifies HD from being a monopoly.


I'd forgotten about Lowe's. Of course, so have a lot of other people --- I'll bet Home Depot has at least 7 stores closer to me than the nearest Lowe's.

Your point stands, though. We have a lot of Ace Hardwares around here, and even some Mom & Pop hardware stores, despite the conventional wisdom's "doom and gloom" about how Home Depot was going to supposedly wipe them all out.


----------



## karencantwell (Jun 17, 2010)

They call it "Amazon" for a reason. Notice they don't call themselves, "Diminutive" or "Runty" "We-strive-to-be-average." It's AMAZON. And every business decision, every product, every move they've made has lived up to the name AMAZON.  Mark Coker didn't see something like this coming? Really?

and Monique - great letter! Loved it.  You writes real good!  

While I've enrolled one book, I still say I have no idea how this will all go down and whether or not it will be prove valuable to me and my readers. It will be an interesting 90 days . . .


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Asher MacDonald said:


> I think there is a way to use the lending library and still use Smashwords and other vendors. Put it on Amazon first for three months and take advantage of the free tool and then put it up at other places.
> 
> You can also take just one book and put it up and use it as a way to advertise your other books that are on other vendors.
> 
> ...


Exactly! Put one book up, and sell all the rest everywhere else.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"They call it "Amazon" for a reason."_

It's the great female competitive spirit.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

As long as I can keep my boobies, I'm in.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"They call it "Amazon" for a reason."_
> 
> It's the great female competitive spirit.


Really? I thought the name was inspired by this:






: P

I jest, of course. I love me some capitalism. "Would you kindly?"

B.


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

Ian Fraser said:


> Putting all your sellable eggs in one basket and defending a company that's trying to entice you into doing this, is ludicrous.


People are going to act in their own self-interest. Expecting individuals to sacrifice their business due to unproven fears is ludicrous.


----------



## Mr. Coffee Snob (Jun 27, 2011)

Ian Fraser said:


> I look at that big money figure sitting on the web page and see a dangling carrot for the greedy and short-sighted, much as I see 'lotteries' as being for people who can't do mathematics.
> 
> Putting all your sellable eggs in one basket and defending a company that's trying to entice you into doing this, is ludicrous.


I don't agree that writers opting to trade exclusivity on a book for 90 days for a few promotional tools makes them greedy or shortsighted. Everyone wants to find an angle and get ahead. That's part of the game of a professional writer. Success is often found through a number of decisions (experiments). Yes, Amazon has dangled a carrot for the ultimate purpose of making more money. We all know why the carrot is there. That's business. But some of us see that we can use it to our advantage and will cautiously take the bait. Also, I don't see many people putting all their eggs in one basket. Maybe one or two eggs.  And even if it's the whole dozen, they can pluck them out in 90 days. I respect your right to an opinion, of course, but I just don't understand how it's greedy or shortsighted to attempt to use a business move to gain some traction.


----------



## Robert Bidinotto (Mar 3, 2011)

The whining against Amazon echoes the timeless whining of others who were out-competed in the marketplace because they provided inferior products and services.

I was in Smashwords exactly as long as I've been with KDP. After all the promises to distribute me to Apple, Kobo, Sony, and the rest, what, exactly, has Smashwords done for me in 5 months from June 21 till Dec. 8, when I signed with KDP Select?

12 sales.

Yep. 12 lousy sales.

I did the same with Barnes & Noble, by uploading to PubIt at exactly the same time that I uploaded to KDP. So, what, exactly, has PubIt done for me in 5 months, up till Dec. 8, when I bailed on them?

120 sales.

This is Barnes & Noble, folks. And my presence there generated just 120 sales in five months.

Add them together, and all my non-Kindle ebook sales totaled 132 ebooks.

Now, what has Amazon done for me in that same time span, through December 8?

36,599 sales.

Okay, to be fair, let me subtract the 470 print book sales I made during that time -- books printed and distributed, incidentally, by Amazon (CreateSpace). How many Kindle ebooks have sold?

36,089.

On my better days during the past two weeks, I've made more sales in half an hour than the combined 5-month total sales I've gotten through Barnes & Noble AND Smashwords (distributing to all other platforms).

And you know what else? When, months after enrollment, I emailed Smashwords about the lousy, unformatted, error-riddled product pages on the sites they were distributing to -- Apple, Sony, and Kobo (where I couldn't even find HUNTER listed), I got a tardy response indicating that they would send some kind of email to those retailers about it -- and an admonition to do better marketing on my own.

I was selling many, many times more books on Amazon long *before* they turned the spotlight on HUNTER on November 27. On that basis alone, working with them over BN or Smashwords would have been a no-brainer. But now?

Get real.

I don't want excuses from distributors and retailers; I want results. If they can't distribute effectively, or to viable book retailers, or at least showcase books properly on their own web pages, then they have no business whining about how "unfair" Amazon is. Amazon got big by providing more products and more services to more people, and at cheaper prices, than anyone else. If that's a "monopoly," then sign me up with 'em. Because the one TRUE monopoly that all of the whining competitors seem only too eager to turn to for redress against Big Bad Amazon is the GOVERNMENT. And that's a monopoly not exactly known for stellar customer service.


----------



## AnitaBartholomew (Jun 27, 2011)

Amazon has always been cutthroat. This newest offer to authors might convince competitors to actually, well, compete. And that would be good for authors because innovation in marketing our books is essential to a healthy market.

But we don't really want Amazon to come out a winner here because once it has truly cornered the market, you can say good-bye to those 70% royalties and other goodies. 

Again, read the first line: Amazon has always been cutthroat. Whether it's cutting your throat or that of the heads of Random House, Barnes & Noble, or Smashwords makes no difference. Its objective is to gather up all the chips on the table. 

Our objective should be for it to do great things for us which are then matched or bested by others vying for our attention, so that everyone wins.

Anita


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

It will be very interesting to see how long it takes SW to remove books from vendor sites after notification from authors.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Robert Bidinotto said:


> The whining against Amazon echoes the timeless whining of others who were out-competed in the marketplace because they provided inferior products and services.


This is quite true. Amazon is light years ahead of SW and B&N and all the other ebook peddlers out there. Even if a book gets borrowed only a few times, it will have had far more exposure than SW or B&N would ever give it. Right now, sadly the others all have little to offer. You can sell on B&N, but they really spotlight publishers books and give indies short shrift. SW does try, but they have been eclipsed by Amazon. They need to do more than simply warehouse ebooks--they have to promote them too.

Does SW or B&N feature promos for indies the way Amazon does? They both have a lot of catching up to do.

Look around you where you live and usually the stores that provide the best value and shopping experience sell the most stuff--same thing on the internet.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

B&N has been an odd duck for some writers. Some have sold better on B&N than Amazon. I haven't heard of anyone else selling better on the other outlets, though. 

What remains to be seen is if Apple, Kobo, B&N, and others actually care about indie books beyond allowing them to be listed. So far it seems like they've hitched their wagons to the big publishers and want the publishers to generate sales. It's as if they think indie sales are so small as to not be worth the effort. Why go to the trouble and expense to come up with good search and display algorithms when the big publishers will drive sales for you?


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

AnitaBartholomew said:


> Amazon has always been cutthroat. This newest offer to authors might convince competitors to actually, well, compete. And that would be good for authors because innovation in marketing our books is essential to a healthy market.
> 
> But we don't really want Amazon to come out a winner here because once it has truly cornered the market, you can say good-bye to those 70% royalties and other goodies.
> 
> ...


The thing is that B&N and SW are pretty much refusing to compete.

Mark Coker says we're supposed to list there out of--gratitude or something but they won't bother to do anything for us.

B&N just ignores us. Apple is so far into bed with the Big 6, they simply don't care.

Maybe this will kick a few butts into realising that indies are an asset, it's a good thing.


----------



## ETS PRESS (Nov 4, 2011)

AnitaBartholomew said:


> But we don't really want Amazon to come out a winner here because once it has truly cornered the market, you can say good-bye to those 70% royalties and other goodies. Anita


You are making an assumption. I think Amazon would be hard pressed to change the royalty structure to the detriment of independent publishers and authors at this point in the game. Cornering the market doesn't guarantee holding onto the market.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

ETS PRESS said:


> You are making an assumption. I think Amazon would be hard pressed to change the royalty structure to the detriment of independent publishers and authors at this point in the game. Cornering the market doesn't guarantee holding onto the market.


Exactly. You spend 12x as much to get a new customer as you do to keeping one. Every company saw what happened when Netflix raised its prices. Amazon is making a killing on their existing breakdown. It works. I don't think they want to open a door to a competitor, because it will happen soon enough anyway.


----------



## Rusty Bigfoot (Jul 6, 2011)

If it weren't for Azon, I'd feel like a real loser. For every dollar I sell on Azon, it's maybe a penny on everyone else combined.


----------



## Julie Christensen (Oct 13, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> This actually turns my stomach a bit. It's one thing for a store to say "We will match any competitor's ad." It is another to say, "go shop in our competitor's shop, get assistance from their employees on how the item works, sample the product, and then we'll give you a 5% off discount to buy it from us." THAT is predatory. And that should concern a lot of people.


Agreed. Most of my book sales are from Amazon, and I appreciate the opportunity they gave me, but I still believe there are some things more important than selling more books.


----------



## Matthew.Iden (Nov 6, 2011)

There are two closely linked arguments running in this thread. 

The first is "how, as an indie author, do I respond to Amazon's overtures to tempt me away from their competitors and is the way they're doing it fair?" And the overwhelming answer is pretty easy and self-evident: if 99% of your sales come from Amazon, competitors aren't willing to match A's distribution and exposure successes, and KDP Select is on a 90 trial, there's no argument.

The second and less easily answered question is: if no competitor can or will respond to Amazon's moves and it does corner the Ebook/indie market, where does that leave the future of indie publishing? And the uncomfortable truth seems to be that it doesn't matter, because the only thing an indie author can do at the moment to push back against this possibility would be to refuse to join KDP Select in (a somewhat symbolic and empty) protest. Doing that, however, might signal to Smash, Apple, B&N, that there's no need to compete or improve, that there are enough indies out there willing to stick it out against Amazon.

Which leaves me feeling distinctly like the horseshoe on the anvil. I don't want to be beholden to Amazon, no matter how good they've been to me in the past. And I don't want to be stuck with the other distributors who don't seem to care about making a sound business model. 

The subversive in me thinks the only solution is an author co-op where writers take control of their own future, but that idea is so far from reality that it's hard to even talk about it with a straight face.


----------



## Guest (Dec 11, 2011)

Matthew.Iden said:


> There are two closely linked arguments running in this thread.
> 
> The first is "how, as an indie author, do I respond to Amazon's overtures to tempt me away from their competitors and is the way they're doing it fair?" And the overwhelming answer is pretty easy and self-evident: if 99% of your sales come from Amazon, competitors aren't willing to match A's distribution and exposure successes, and KDP Select is on a 90 trial, there's no argument.
> 
> ...


This is a quality post. Well done, Matthew.


----------



## melissafmiller (Feb 17, 2011)

Matthew.Iden said:


> There are two closely linked arguments running in this thread.
> 
> The first is "how, as an indie author, do I respond to Amazon's overtures to tempt me away from their competitors and is the way they're doing it fair?" And the overwhelming answer is pretty easy and self-evident: if 99% of your sales come from Amazon, competitors aren't willing to match A's distribution and exposure successes, and KDP Select is on a 90 trial, there's no argument.
> 
> ...


What foreverjuly said.


----------



## Matthew.Iden (Nov 6, 2011)

Thanks guys. The info on Select is flying so fast and furious that I had to spell it out for myself or my head would explode.


----------



## adamelijah (Nov 16, 2010)

I'm not going to pull my first book, Tales of the Dim Knight off of Smashwords, too inconvenient for everyone involved, but I'd been waiting 8 days for them to approve my second ebook, which was only 17k words long and I went ahead and yanked it off Smashwords and decided I'd rather go with Kindle Select and hope to get a piece of the $500,000 pie with "All I Needed to Know I Learned from Columbo." rather than continue to wait to hear something from Smashwords.

I don't think that Kindle is trying to knock all of its competitors out. I think its trying to become the HBO of Premium Content. There's a certain window during which a movie out of theater can only be played on Pay TV, but later it can be distributed to other places.


----------



## ETS PRESS (Nov 4, 2011)

Matthew.Iden said:


> Thanks guys. The info on Select is flying so fast and furious that I had to spell it out for myself or my head would explode.


I'm not sure I would call all of it information. It's more like "speculation".


----------



## Guest (Dec 11, 2011)

SW cannot compete with Amazon if by compete you mean PRICE MEANS EVERYTHING and nothing else matters.  And it can't compete for the same reason a mom-n-pop shop cannot compete against WalMart.  You can't beat WalMart on price.  You can't beat Amazon on price.  If you define competition by price alone, then the war is already over.

But I do find it strange how a community that so readily complains about how all the "Big Six" care about is money will so readily push aside the company that has busted its butt promoting indies in favor of the company that busts its butt promoting itself.  I love Amazon, too.  But Amazon is not my friend and does not have my best interests at heart.  Amazon looks at data and does what is most favorable for Amazon.  SW has spent its existence promoting indie writers.  It has based its existence on providing a dedicated platform for indie authors.  Amazon rearranged the furniture and made some room for us.  SW built us our own house.  And maybe that house isn't as big as we would like it to be or as fancy, but it was built for indies.  But damnit just like so many people whine and moan about how indies should support each other, maybe I feel supporting indies should also include those people who have in fact supported us like SW.  

Fact is SW gives me tools Amazon does not.  I can offer multiple formats.  I can offer coupon codes.  I can set the amount I want to give affiliates to help promote my books.  It isn't a perfect system.  But neither is Amazon.  Amazon is far more restrictive in what you can and cannot do that SW.  And I'm not willing to restrict my ability to market the way I want just to maybe gain a tiny bit of visibility on Amazon.  

Yes, each person needs to do what is in their best interest as a business.  BUT, I swear some of these comments are the equivalent of pointing your finger and laughing.  You guys see Mark as whining.  I see someone who genuinely cares about indies, because I have never had a reason to think anything else of Mark.  He's always shown his commitment to the indie community.  He was supportive of the indie community when it was the ugly wallflower none of the popular guys wanted to dance with.  Now that the Homecoming King has asked you to go steady, you've forgotten who was the person who told you that you were beautiful at the beginning.


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> SW cannot compete with Amazon if by compete you mean PRICE MEANS EVERYTHING and nothing else matters. And it can't compete for the same reason a mom-n-pop shop cannot compete against WalMart. You can't beat WalMart on price. You can't beat Amazon on price. If you define competition by price alone, then the war is already over.
> 
> But I do find it strange how a community that so readily complains about how all the "Big Six" care about is money will so readily push aside the company that has busted its butt promoting indies in favor of the company that busts its butt promoting itself. I love Amazon, too. But Amazon is not my friend and does not have my best interests at heart. Amazon looks at data and does what is most favorable for Amazon. SW has spent its existence promoting indie writers. It has based its existence on providing a dedicated platform for indie authors. Amazon rearranged the furniture and made some room for us. SW built us our own house. And maybe that house isn't as big as we would like it to be or as fancy, but it was built for indies. But damnit just like so many people whine and moan about how indies should support each other, maybe I feel supporting indies should also include those people who have in fact supported us like SW.
> 
> ...


Well put, Julie. We're all struggling with this continually changing environment.

I'm experimenting by enrolling one book for three months with Amazon Prime. It was a tough call, but I chose to experiment with a novel that's been out for about a year and selling well on Amazon. My new novel will be coming out next week in all eformats--not limited to Amazon. I have no intention of publishing solely on Amazon, but I wanted to give the Amazon lending library a try. I view it as another promotional avenue.


----------



## ETS PRESS (Nov 4, 2011)

If you are the little guy, then you have to find innovative ways to play over and around the big boys. It is what it is. Every indie doesn't have undying loyalty to SW. I put two books up on SW when they first opened their doors. I've never, ever had a sale on SW. Not one. Nada. Zip. Goose eggs. SW is not a viable market for me. But I do have loyalty to Teachers Pay Teachers. Now, we are talking about a little guy who got bought out by Scholastic, and then when Scholastic didn't see a future they sold it back to the little guy. TPT is innovative. Paul (the little guy) put his eggs into one basket and his faith into an idea that has literally exploded. I make a lot of money there, so no, I won't pull my books from TPT to sign up exclusively with Amazon. I do have a lot of respect for the power of Amazon. My books have been there for a little over a month now, and they are selling. I'm finding an audience. I did go exclusive with my DIY book. It was already exclusive on Amazon, so it's not a big deal. I might make a future title exclusive for 90 days to see if it helps me find my audience on Amazon, but I won't keep it that way forever. I already know I can make sales on TPT. SW? I might try again at some point -mainly to get into the distribution channel, but I don't have any real expectations. So yes, I believe in supporting the little guy, after all, _we_ are all little guys, but in the end each person needs to make the best decision for themselves. This is not an all or nothing decision. It's not even a do it or else. It's an OPTION. It merits consideration. Some will. Some won't. So what? Everyone needs to do what is best for their own self interests and let Amazon and SW take care of themselves. Little guys never prosper staying up all night worrying about the big guys. The successful little guy thinks outside of the box, and uses everything they can to their advantage. And remember, the big guys used to be little guys too.


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Why? They are already paying customers to use stores as a showroom, but then buy from them. And while this little app is not for books...yet...how long until it is? This actually turns my stomach a bit. It's one thing for a store to say "We will match any competitor's ad." It is another to say, "go shop in our competitor's shop, get assistance from their employees on how the item works, sample the product, and then we'll give you a 5% off discount to buy it from us." THAT is predatory. And that should concern a lot of people.


Actually, since Amazon built the best searchable website available, I know a LOT of Nook, Sony, and other ereader owners who go searching on Amazon for books but then buy elsewhere. Maybe this is a move to try to stop some of that.

Vicki


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Matthew.Iden said:


> There are two closely linked arguments running in this thread.
> 
> The first is "how, as an indie author, do I respond to Amazon's overtures to tempt me away from their competitors and is the way they're doing it fair?" And the overwhelming answer is pretty easy and self-evident: if 99% of your sales come from Amazon, competitors aren't willing to match A's distribution and exposure successes, and KDP Select is on a 90 trial, there's no argument.
> 
> ...


Clipping this for posterity.



Matthew.Iden said:


> Thanks guys. The info on Select is flying so fast and furious that I had to spell it out for myself or my head would explode.


It's too late for me...but I think you nailed it.

B.


----------



## Steve Silkin (Sep 15, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> He was supportive of the indie community when it was the ugly wallflower none of the popular guys wanted to dance with. Now that the Homecoming King has asked you to go steady, you've forgotten who was the person who told you that you were beautiful at the beginning.


Eliza has to go with Freddie. She can't stay with Professor Higgins, even though he made her who she is.

That aside, I think this thread did contain super-great suggestions for Mark (whom I love for all the reasons that have been stated above, plus my own: that formatting guide taught me more about how e-readers work than anything else I've read). Mark now understands has a competitive relationship with Amazon instead of (what I think he hoped would be) a cooperative one. So Vicki's suggestion that Mark find a way to make Smashwords more valuable to serious indie authors - a "recommended" page? - other promotions? - advertising opportunities? - is a path he should pursue, due to some of the reasoning that was expressed often in this thread: If we were making enough sales (and in my case and probably many others, that would mean even modest sales) on iTunes, B&N and Kobo via Smashwords, few would even be tempted to go exclusive elsewhere, even for 90 days.


----------



## Jon Olson (Dec 10, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> Vicki, the problem with that is Smashwords has never made attracting quality a priority. It operates under the "I still make a million dollars if one million books make 1 dollar" strategy.


Not too different from, ah, er, Amazon.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Doing that, however, might signal to Smash, Apple, B&N, that there's no need to compete or improve, that there are enough indies out there willing to stick it out against Amazon."_

We're not smart enough to game out the future on this. We haven't been smart enough in any other industry, and I don't see writers as smarter than anyone else.

However, we have lots of evidence that large numbers of people acting in their own self-interest in a free market generate industries and markets that deliver more prosperity than any other model that has been tried. That means more than any other model that has been tried in the real world.

So I encourage everyone to act in their own self-interest. That means do what is best for you. Forget everyone else. The genius of capitalism is that it has harnessed the selfish and acquisitive nature of people to generate the most prosperity for the most people we have ever seen*. One of the things we have to accept is we will not be able to understand how it all happens. But we can observe things working even when we don't understand how they work.

And for the folks worried about Amazon becoming a monopoly? Just stop and look around. What other retail monopolies do you see? What's the name of the company, not the theory? Like I said, we're not smart enough.

*This is a big problem for philosophers, theologians, and ethicists, and they really do think they are smarter than the rest of us.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Steve Silkin said:


> Eliza has to go with Freddie. She can't stay with Professor Higgins, even though he made her who she is.
> 
> That aside, I think this thread did contain super-great suggestions for Mark (whom I love for all the reasons that have been stated above, plus my own: that formatting guide taught me more about how e-readers work than anything else I've read). Mark now understands has a competitive relationship with Amazon instead of (what I think he hoped would be) a cooperative one. So Vicki's suggestion that Mark find a way to make Smashwords more valuable to serious indie authors - a "recommended" page? - other promotions? - advertising opportunities? - is a path he should pursue, due to some of the reasoning that was expressed often in this thread: If we were making enough sales (and in my case and probably many others, that would mean even modest sales) on iTunes, B&N and Kobo via Smashwords, few would even be tempted to go exclusive elsewhere, even for 90 days.


Agreed.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"So Vicki's suggestion that Mark find a way to make Smashwords more valuable to serious indie authors - a "recommended" page? - other promotions? - advertising opportunities? - is a path he should pursue,"_

Success in these things doesn't come from being attractive to suppliers. It comes from being attractive to consumers. That's what Amazon has done. It has concentrated on consumers, not suppliers. Suppliers flock to Amazon because it has provided one tool after another to help consumers buy books.

Amazon is the seller. Consumers are the buyers. Authors supply the seller, and will seek out the seller venue where consumers congregate. This is just like dealing with widgets.

So Amazon's Prime select program? It is aimed at consumers. As a Prime member with a Kindle, I think it is wonderful.


----------



## Guest (Dec 11, 2011)

Jon Olson said:


> Not too different from, ah, er, Amazon.


Amazon will happily take its cut from a book that only sells 1 copy, but obviously when it puts its weight behind an author or a book that it thinks can sell, it can generate a huge volume of money for both itself and the author.


----------



## MarkCoker (Feb 15, 2009)

A few thoughts:

1.  Whining - Definitely not.  I've given indies a warning about the dangers of exclusivity, and the potential long term harm of becoming wholly dependent upon a single retailer.  Do what you want with the warning.

2.  Acting in one's self-interest - Ultimately, we all act in our own self-interest.  I agree with the folks here who stress that indies are running a business and should view these decisions as business decisions.  I would just encourage people not to confuse their short term interests with long term interests.  Many Smashwords authors are seeing their percentage of sales from the Smashwords distribution network increase each year.  Those who yank books out of distribution only to republish then yank again and republish yet again will never understand their missed opportunity.  My self interest is to help indies be successful.  Several SW authors have emailed me and asked if they should remove all their books from Amazon in protest.  I've urged every author to stick with Amazon.  Make what you want of that.  Obviously Amazon would not return the favor.

3.  The need for SW to improve - I totally agree.  We've been improving consistently for the last 3.5 years.  We'll never stop.

4.  The impact of this on SW - We've felt an impact, but not what some of the blood lusting doomsayers here have anticipated.  2011 was a great year for our authors, and 2012 will be even better.   

Good luck all, whatever your approach or opinion.

best,
mark


----------



## Mr. Coffee Snob (Jun 27, 2011)

Mark, I haven't worked with Smashwords yet (other than a free short story giveaway recently that resulted in quite a few downloads). But one thing you offer that I really like is the business of giving free books to soldiers. I would love to eventually get a book or two on Smashwords just to take advantage of that. And as you have pointed out, one goal is to expand and reach new readers, which is a long-term process . I'm going with some projects in Select to take advantage of quick and easy free promotions and the lending business. However, I feel Smashwords has a lot to offer and I hope it prospers. My view is that it would be unwise for a writer to pull a book off Smashwords that is selling or growing a reader base (I certainly wouldn't do it), and I would be surprised if many writers did that.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Victorine said:


> Actually, since Amazon built the best searchable website available, I know a LOT of Nook, Sony, and other ereader owners who go searching on Amazon for books but then buy elsewhere. Maybe this is a move to try to stop some of that.
> 
> Vicki


That's so true. Several people here in this forum say that they do that. Good point, Vicki.


----------



## SaraJoEaston (Dec 10, 2011)

Personally, I won't remove my book from Smashwords. I've been slowly building a readership there, and I wouldn't want to isolate them. Smashwords makes it easier for me to format books and send them to multiple retailers. I also love my ability to gift books via coupon if I so choose. I own a Kindle, so I plan to stick with Amazon, but closing off opportunities seems like a waste to me.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> SW cannot compete with Amazon if by compete you mean PRICE MEANS EVERYTHING and nothing else matters. And it can't compete for the same reason a mom-n-pop shop cannot compete against WalMart. You can't beat WalMart on price. You can't beat Amazon on price. If you define competition by price alone, then the war is already over.
> 
> But I do find it strange how a community that so readily complains about how all the "Big Six" care about is money will so readily push aside the company that has busted its butt promoting indies in favor of the company that busts its butt promoting itself. I love Amazon, too. But Amazon is not my friend and does not have my best interests at heart. Amazon looks at data and does what is most favorable for Amazon. SW has spent its existence promoting indie writers. It has based its existence on providing a dedicated platform for indie authors. Amazon rearranged the furniture and made some room for us. SW built us our own house. And maybe that house isn't as big as we would like it to be or as fancy, but it was built for indies. But damnit just like so many people whine and moan about how indies should support each other, maybe I feel supporting indies should also include those people who have in fact supported us like SW.
> 
> ...


Fwiw, this is my favorite Julie post of all time.

IMO, Smashwords deserves the benefit of the doubt and Smashwords deserves our loyalty. That doesn't mean I think you shouldn't use KDP Select for some or even all of your books, but Smashwords has done a lot for most of us. Free books, Coupons, ISBNs, file conversations, long samples, access to iBooks and Kobo and Sony, access to B&N before PubIt.

I have often found the Smashwords website really frustrating to work with, but at the same time, Mark has never failed to help me when I've needed his help.

I wish Smashwords had a more responsive CS staff that would answer emails so that Mark didn't have to handle so much of the burden. Sorry, Mark, _you_ are great but sending a question to customer service at Smashwords.com is like sending an email into a black hole. This is frustrating.

I wish Smashwords stuck to its scheduled delivery dates for sending out books (I have not found this to be the case) so that we could plan things better.

I wish sales numbers and free downloads were reported in a more timely fashion. Some of these problems might come from the companies SW distributes to--I don't know. But the delays in reporting are frustrating and this is something SW needs to do better because the other direct services (kdp, pubit, itunes) give us much more up-to-date information.

I wish Smashwords approved books for premium status more quickly. Authors are now used to getting a book up at Amazon within a day or so.

I don't know what the issues is--maybe it's manpower. But I think these are some of the things that SW needs to do better. These are just my thoughts, and I'm speaking as someone who doesn't want to see any one store become the only game in town--and as someone who is grateful for what Smashwords has done for me and many other independent authors.


----------



## N. Gemini Sasson (Jul 5, 2010)

As much as this move by Amazon has stirred things up, it has the potential to have some far-reaching effects with Amazon's competitors. We can speculate indefinitely, but whether it will or won't, or how much so, remains to be seen. 

I am part of what seems like the minority these days - I did not enroll in KDP Select. Three of my four books are a trilogy and the other one is very closely related. While sales elsewhere for me are only a couple per cent of what my Kindle sales are, they have been steadily growing and I do have readers who don't own Kindles ask me when my most recent releases will be available on other e-readers. To me, that small percent of readers matters.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> I wish Smashwords had a more responsive CS staff that would answer emails so that Mark didn't have to handle so much of the burden. Sorry, Mark, _you_ are great but sending a question to customer service at Smashwords.com is like sending an email into a black hole. This is frustrating.


I should note that in the past six weeks, I have had excellent service/responses from Smashwords CS staff, so that is improving.

My only real complaint about Smashwords itself is not allowing direct epub uploads. Right now, I don't have any books that I can't get through the meatgrinder - though once or twice I've gotten caught in the annoying "trial and error, guess what's wrong" cycle. But I consciously avoid ANY formatting beyond chapter headers, which I'd rather not feel like I have to do. What I'd like to do with my TOC is not possible via the meatgrinder any more (at least wasn't from May-July last time I dealt with it).

Anyway, beyond that, I feel like Smashwords has been making progress on the key elements of improving as a distributor. If you look at where they are now compared to 12 months ago, the meatgrinder is now fast, they have more CS people, accounting reports have improved and are faster. All of these things can improve a lot more, but aside from the glaring problem of not being able to upload pre-formatted books, I think they have been addressing what needs to be addressed.

I'll note that I am talking about distribution here - I don't really consider Smashwords a retailer. I think of them more like the Createspace store in that regard. And that's fine with me, I'm more than content for Mark to focus on distribution. In fact, I hope Mark doesn't focus on that - I believe it would be a mistake until all the pieces of distribution are as slick as they possibly can be.

Because Smashwords is essentially a distributor, the main problem is that his distribution partners either don't want to create an environment that has good discoverability for indies (Apple, B&N) or are incapable of it (Kobo). Any of these partners might change for the better, especially Kobo's competence level, but it has not happened yet. Side note - why do Kobo books published via Smashwords have DRM on them?

All that said, I'm only pulling one of my 6 books, and it's my least-selling one. I'm not doing it because Amazon is the only retail partner who has aligned its self-interest with my success, though I fully get that type of decision. If right now I were making four or five grand a month off Amazon and didn't have another source of income, I would probably be jumping into KDP select with both feet. A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow.

I'm doing it because I think having different books with different dynamics will have a net positive on my sales. That's why I co-write a book with another well-selling author. That's why the more books I have, the greater price range I plan to have. Having a book in the lending library and being able to go free is one more variation for me to try.


----------



## yomamma (Feb 10, 2011)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> Fwiw, this is my favorite Julie post of all time.
> 
> IMO, Smashwords deserves the benefit of the doubt and Smashwords deserves our loyalty. That doesn't mean I think you shouldn't use KDP Select for some or even all of your books, but Smashwords has done a lot for most of us. Free books, Coupons, ISBNs, file conversations, long samples, access to iBooks and Kobo and Sony, access to B&N before PubIt.
> 
> ...


I love this post and agree with everything here. If I had two things I would ask of Smashwords, I would ask that it be easier to upload a formatted file (I run into trouble EVERY time and end up sending off to a formatter). That, and I feel like the store could use a facelift and ease of searching-lift. Everything else, IMO, is livable. I want to be able to upload without wasting an entire afternoon looking for one friggin page break, and I want it to be a more comfortable store for international shoppers. Anything else, IMO, is gravy.


----------



## Victoria J (Jul 5, 2011)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> IMO, Smashwords deserves the benefit of the doubt and Smashwords deserves our loyalty. That doesn't mean I think you shouldn't use KDP Select for some or even all of your books, but Smashwords has done a lot for most of us. Free books, Coupons, ISBNs, file conversations, long samples, access to iBooks and Kobo and Sony, access to B&N before PubIt.


Agreed!


----------



## Tommie Lyn (Dec 7, 2009)

I must confess I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but...I'm wondering why everyone is focused on one facet of this situation, namely, a perceived attempt by Amazon to monopolize ebook sales. That view just seems a little near-sighted, to me. (The old saw about when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail...er...well, that doesn't quite fit, but perhaps you get my drift. Since we are bound up in the ebook world, we judge everything by how it affects our ebooks.)

My first reaction when I heard about Select wasn't about ebooks at all. It was: "Oh...they're using the lure of free reads to sweeten the pot and get more folks to 1) buy a Kindle, and 2) sign up for Amazon Prime." And, imho, having someone opt for membership in Amazon Prime is of far more benefit to Amazon than stamping out competitors in ebook sales. 

Think about it. An Amazon Prime member is more likely to make purchases through Amazon, not just of ebooks, but of everything else, too.

Anybody got a whetstone?


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

I don't see basing my marketing decisions on a dystopian view of what Amazon may become in the future. Right now, they could become quite a bit more "evil" and still treat me better than their competitors.

The epub consortium really lost me when they took a beautiful, open standard and ruined it with their proprietary DRM schemes. Why would I buy an ebook from B&N that can only be read on a nook? Kobo and Sony allied themselves with Adobe Digital Editions, which is clunky and miserable (in my experience).

Smashwords allows me to sell my book without DRM. Great! The only problem is, their shopping experience is pretty sad and in no way competitive with Amazon.

Amazon lets me sell _Risen _without DRM and provides a super shopping experience.

Honestly, if I were a nook owner interested in _Risen_, I'd still buy it at Amazon, convert it to an epub with Calibre, and have an ebook that will be portable across readers as the ereader landscape changes.

The epub retailers have squandered the only advantage they had...the open standard that would have allowed "any ebook on any ereader." They could have banded together like a bundle of sticks to battle the Amazon "log," but they didn't. So they're getting smashed, one by one.

Maybe I've been assimilated, as per my avatar, but that's how it seems to shake out.


----------



## Jackie Barbosa (Mar 23, 2011)

Victorine said:


> Even if I earned $100 a month from Smashwords, and earned $1,000 from Amazon, I still would have to really think hard before ditching that $100 a month and going exclusive.


I've sold a grand total of maybe 3 copies from Smashwords itself, but when I add in the sales at the third parties they distribute to (Kobo, Sony, and especially Apple), I see Smashwords as pretty much indispensable to my overall strategy. I'm planning to distribute direct to Apple with my upcoming novella, provided they get around to approving my account sometime this year, but I still wouldn't want to lose Kobo or Sony, where I don't sell in *huge* numbers by any means, but where I sell at least as many copies combined as I sell on B&N. And except for a few months during the summer when my short story sold like crazy on Amazon, B&N accounts for about 35-40% of my sales.

Smashwords could do a lot to improve the experience for both authors and customers, of course, but I think they've provided self-publishing authors with a pretty valuable service that gets us into retail outlets we couldn't touch otherwise.


----------



## yomamma (Feb 10, 2011)

Jan Strnad said:


> Honestly, if I were a nook owner interested in _Risen_, I'd still buy it at Amazon, convert it to an epub with Calibre, and have an ebook that will be portable across readers as the ereader landscape changes.


And as someone who owns both a Nook and a Kindle, I'd say...dude. You've never had the fun of converting an Amazon file and then trying to read it on your Nook, have you? I did a few times and gave up. I'd rather spend a few dollars more to get a properly formatted file than try and read one that's all jarring and messy.

Also? You have to consider that a lot of people won't grasp sideloading, or stripping DRM or all that fun jazz. They just want to click and buy. People like my mom, for example.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

jillmyles said:


> Also? You have to consider that a lot of people won't grasp sideloading, or stripping DRM or all that fun jazz. They just want to click and buy. People like my mom, for example.


Jill ... (goes into his best Darth Vader voice) ... *I* am your mother.


----------



## Guest (Dec 12, 2011)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> Jill ... (goes into his best Darth Vader voice) ... *I* am your mother.


Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to stop with the gimmick infringement. This forum only has room for one Sith, and you are far too nice to qualify...


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to stop with the gimmick infringement. This forum only has room for one Sith, and you are far too nice to qualify...


Well. I did cross the line there, didn't I?


----------



## J. Tanner (Aug 22, 2011)

Tommie Lyn said:


> I must confess I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but...I'm wondering why everyone is focused on one facet of this situation, namely, a perceived attempt by Amazon to monopolize ebook sales. That view just seems a little near-sighted, to me. (The old saw about when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail...er...well, that doesn't quite fit, but perhaps you get my drift. Since we are bound up in the ebook world, we judge everything by how it affects our ebooks.)
> 
> My first reaction when I heard about Select wasn't about ebooks at all. It was: "Oh...they're using the lure of free reads to sweeten the pot and get more folks to 1) buy a Kindle, and 2) sign up for Amazon Prime." And, imho, having someone opt for membership in Amazon Prime is of far more benefit to Amazon than stamping out competitors in ebook sales.


If those were their actual primary goals then they would not have required Amazon exclusivity to be part of the KDP Select program. They would have opened it up to everyone. They would have achieved those goals to a greater extent. But they didn't do that. So there is obviously something more to their goal (and exclusivity generally means the goal is depriving the competition of the content.)


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

J. Tanner said:


> If those were their actual primary goals then they would not have required Amazon exclusivity to be part of the KDP Select program. They would have opened it up to everyone. They would have achieved those goals to a greater extent. But they didn't do that. So there is obviously something more to their goal (and exclusivity generally means the goal is depriving the competition of the content.)


I don't agree. In order to get people to pay for Prime, the benefits have to be clear and one benefit is content they can't find elsewhere. That the content is exclusive is secondary to selling the Prime membership and just an inducement to possible Prime members. That's how it looks to me anyway.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

I'd say it's a mistake to try to severe exclusivity from a far larger coordinated campaign to attract customers by using Kindle subsidies, Fire subsidies, Prime Select, Prime Video, Prime shipping, free prime for students, and free trial Prime for Fire buyers. They didn't do all that to get books off SmashWords.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to stop with the gimmick infringement. This forum only has room for one Sith, and you are far too nice to qualify...


Only one Sith? What about the Rule of Two? Unless someone has recently killed one of them. Which would leave. . .the master? The apprentice?


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

modwitch said:


> I'm not sure I want to know the answer to this...


Me neither. My big mouth is always getting me (and others in trouble)


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I'd say it's a mistake to try to severe exclusivity from a far larger coordinated campaign to attract customers by using Kindle subsidies, Fire subsidies, Prime Select, Prime Video, Prime shipping, free prime for students, and free trial Prime for Fire buyers. They didn't do all that to get books off SmashWords.


And yet, there's no need to ask for Amazon to ask for exclusivity unless Amazon is actively trying to get authors to remove their ebooks from other stores' shelves, even if it's just for three months (though let's be honest, many books will stay in Select indefinitely).


----------



## Julie Christensen (Oct 13, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> SW cannot compete with Amazon if by compete you mean PRICE MEANS EVERYTHING and nothing else matters. And it can't compete for the same reason a mom-n-pop shop cannot compete against WalMart. You can't beat WalMart on price. You can't beat Amazon on price. If you define competition by price alone, then the war is already over.
> 
> But I do find it strange how a community that so readily complains about how all the "Big Six" care about is money will so readily push aside the company that has busted its butt promoting indies in favor of the company that busts its butt promoting itself. I love Amazon, too. But Amazon is not my friend and does not have my best interests at heart. Amazon looks at data and does what is most favorable for Amazon. SW has spent its existence promoting indie writers. It has based its existence on providing a dedicated platform for indie authors. Amazon rearranged the furniture and made some room for us. SW built us our own house. And maybe that house isn't as big as we would like it to be or as fancy, but it was built for indies. But damnit just like so many people whine and moan about how indies should support each other, maybe I feel supporting indies should also include those people who have in fact supported us like SW.
> 
> ...


Thank you, Julie. This is beautifully written. You articulated exactly what I was feeling but unable to say myself.

I am personally fed-up with SW. I find their CS unresponsive until things reach an extreme. I've found that Mark Coker, although responsive to some things, wears blinders when it comes to fair criticism of his site. But that doesn't mean I'm throwing the baby out with the bath water. I appreciate his committment to indie authors, even though I barely sell anything off his site or his affiliate sites. The way I look at it is that he was a small company that grew too fast and he has the growing pains to show for it. Maybe this will be a wake-up call. A lot of authors have listed legitimate complaints on this thread. I hope he addresses these concerns. I'm certain that, if he does, SW will continue to grow and be a great "home" as you call it, for indie authors.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> And yet, there's no need to ask for Amazon to ask for exclusivity unless Amazon is actively trying to get authors to remove their ebooks from other stores' shelves, even if it's just for three months (though let's be honest, many books will stay in Select indefinitely).


There IS a reason to ask for exclusivity if they think that finding content on Amazon that they can't fnd elsewhere will induce people to pay for Prime. They are selling prime big time in a number of ways. This is actually one of their more minor efforts.

Edit: Sure, if they can take a slap at B&N, Apple and Kobo while doing that, it's not going to hurt Uncle Jeff's feelings, but I don't think that is even close to the main reason. As for SW, it's a very minor player.


----------



## Simon Haynes (Mar 14, 2011)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> And yet, there's no need to ask for Amazon to ask for exclusivity unless Amazon is actively trying to get authors to remove their ebooks from other stores' shelves, even if it's just for three months (though let's be honest, many books will stay in Select indefinitely).


They will if authors don't realise 'auto renew' is ticked by default ...

As for the competition ... I have 19 titles on Amazon and I enrolled one of them in the Select program. If Smashwords accepted mobi or epub instead of forcing me to use DOC then I wouldn't have faced that choice with this particular book.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"And yet, there's no need to ask for Amazon to ask for exclusivity unless Amazon is actively trying to get authors to remove their ebooks from other stores' shelves, even if it's just for three months (though let's be honest, many books will stay in Select indefinitely)."_

If need is the standard, and Amazon was concerned with getting books off Smashwords, all they need is to make exclusivity a condition of participating in KDP. The option has always been available. No need to go through all this Prime stuff. It's not needed. (There's a thought experiment. Quick, what would you do?)

One can look at Amazon by analyzing the effect of its actions on suppliers and competitors, but their history shows much more concern with customers. They built the business by catering to customer needs rather than battling suppliers or competitors. They have competed by giving customers service that is better than their competitors.

Amazon doesn't call to confide, but there are several plausible reasons why they may want exclusivity. One is to give Prime customers something they can't get anywhere else.


----------



## Kathelm (Sep 27, 2010)

Backtracking a bit. I want to comment on this:



> Honestly, if I were a nook owner interested in Risen, I'd still buy it at Amazon, convert it to an epub with Calibre, and have an ebook that will be portable across readers as the ereader landscape changes.


I think we indie authors have a tendency to over-estimate how dedicated people are to reading our books. (And this is coming from a guy who released his first book with no cover art under the idealistic delusion that anyone who really cares about my book knows it's all about the _words_, man.)

Customers are capricious. If there's any perceived barrier, even the slightest hassle, they will drop interest in a book in a heartbeat and find something easier to read. Customers take the path of least resistance, and sometimes that means a different product. Or torrents. Torrenting seems to be shorthand for "I'm interested, but not willing to put _that much_ effort into getting it your way" in modern media.


----------



## yomamma (Feb 10, 2011)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> Jill ... (goes into his best Darth Vader voice) ... *I* am your mother.


Gasp! Mom? You figured out how to use message boards on the internets? I'm so proud!


----------



## Stephen T. Harper (Dec 20, 2010)

JRTomlin said:


> There IS a reason to ask for exclusivity if they think that finding content on Amazon that they can't fnd elsewhere will induce people to pay for Prime. They are selling prime big time in a number of ways. This is actually one of their more minor efforts.
> 
> Edit: Sure, if they can take a slap at B&N, Apple and Kobo while doing that, it's not going to hurt Uncle Jeff's feelings, but I don't think that is even close to the main reason. As for SW, it's a very minor player.


Gotta agree with this. Indie publishers like us, and even platforms like SW are blips on the radar. One big goal for Amazon, even bigger than the proliferation of "Prime," is to win the hardware war that they started. Video game consoles generally win or lose their cyclical competitions based on the combination of perceived value and selection. Kindles are cheap, and have the widest selection. And Amazon keeps tweaking in favor of their customers. The lending library is another kick to the gut of Nook.

I also think it is entirely correct for writers who are getting fat right now to be concerned about what happens when Amazon thinks it's won. Royalties may drop, DRM may become mandatory... lots of things could happen. But right now, I agree that Amazon has much bigger fish to fry. Indies and ebook-only competitors like SW are not what they are thinking about.

BTW - I'm doing Select with my one title. Did a free promotion this weekend that definitely raised my visibility. More sales on Monday than last week. It's a new book and I wasn't doing huge numbers before, but the giveaway had a very clear benefit.


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

jillmyles said:


> And as someone who owns both a Nook and a Kindle, I'd say...dude. You've never had the fun of converting an Amazon file and then trying to read it on your Nook, have you? I did a few times and gave up. I'd rather spend a few dollars more to get a properly formatted file than try and read one that's all jarring and messy.
> 
> Also? You have to consider that a lot of people won't grasp sideloading, or stripping DRM or all that fun jazz. They just want to click and buy. People like my mom, for example.


Not reading on my nook, but on my Kobo, yes, I've done it. Again, this is without stripping DRM, which I don't use. Of course it isn't as easy as buying with one click, I'll grant that.

Then again, maybe I lose your mother who is too minimally interested and/or tech savvy to buy _Risen _and convert it for her nook, but I pick up four or ten or fifty people who are too minimally interested to pay $2.99 but who'll borrow it through Amazon Prime.

I don't know. Whatever the outcome, I can change my mind in 90 days.


----------



## SBJones (Jun 13, 2011)

If Amazon wanted to crush the competition, they need only do one thing.  Promote.  With roughly 50 million hits a day, they could pick ten random KDP Select books a day and randomly showcase them throughout the day, each getting roughly 5 million "exposures".  New day, new set of books.  Hell even maybe let you schedule the day you are showcased as well as 5 free days (when you launch a new book?).  Or even limit it to those in the top 1,000 or 5,000.  (so you know, you have to promote your work too.)  All for the low price of exclusivity.

Hell pick 50 books.  A million exposures in one day is more than most of us after months/years of tweeting, blogging, Facebooking, etc.  Better have a 5 star cover.

Seriously, all they would need to do is visit this forum alone and pick about 20 high profile, active people and promote the sh!t out of them in a short period of time and we would convert ourselves to become Amazon content zombies.  Or maybe the competition should...


----------



## Guest (Dec 13, 2011)

modwitch said:


> Absolutely. I think Amazon did this for multiple reasons. But I agree with Tommie Lyn that the *primary* driver here wasn't doing in the competition. So I don't expect Amazon to continue hammering down that road, so much as to continue hammering the marketing of Prime memberships. ...snip...


Primary, secondary, tertiary, whatever-ary--you don't think they WANT to do in the competition? How naive can you be? Whatever their other reasons are, quashing competition is the EFFECT of this program for them. And, anyone who joins up in a big way just for possible short term gains is helping to stifle competition, and competition is the only avenue that will lead to the best income for the most writers.


----------



## Guest (Dec 13, 2011)

edwardgtalbot said:


> Only one Sith? What about the Rule of Two? Unless someone has recently killed one of them. Which would leave. . .the master? The apprentice?


I'm a "Old Republic" Sith. We have full academies to train apprentices.   But generally, one Sith per site. More than that and the site explodes with darkside energy. Or those pesky Jedi show up like the Scooby Gang to mess everything up. I hate when that happens...


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I'm a "Old Republic" Sith. We have full academies to train apprentices.   But generally, one Sith per site. More than that and the site explodes with darkside energy. Or those pesky Jedi show up like the Scooby Gang to mess everything up. I hate when that happens...


I did hear a rumor about a Jedi round these here parts. Something about the name Dalglish.


----------



## Guest (Dec 13, 2011)

Kathelm said:


> I think we indie authors have a tendency to over-estimate how dedicated people are to reading our books. (And this is coming from a guy who released his first book with no cover art under the idealistic delusion that anyone who really cares about my book knows it's all about the _words_, man.)


Amen. Big business has ALWAYS known that the more steps required of a customer to complete a transaction, the less likely they are to finish it. And they use this knowledge in a variety of ways to encourage purchasing. The reason one-click is so successful is because once you do it, it is over. Yes, you CAN get a refund, but the actual number of people who bother is very, very small. It is the same effect as rebates. Many people buy things because "Hey, I can mail in for a $10 rebate" but then forget or don't have a stamp to mail the form and forget to go buy some or lose the receipt or whatever. Some studies have shown that 71% of customers are likely to consider a purchase with a good rebate. Meanwhile, A Wall Street Journal article a few years back estimated that 95% of people forget or fail to follow through on a rebate. All business work to make purchasing very, very easy and returns very, very cumbersome because the majority of people won't follow through.

So to make business decisions under the delusion that, if someone cares enough about your book, they will jump through the hoops to figure out how to convert it for a different program is naive at best and full of hubris as worst. Customers don't care about our books. They care about finding something interesting to read. They don't buy because they are concerned about our wants. They buy because they are concerned about their own wants. And the more work you expect them to do, the less likely they will bother with you.


----------



## Guest (Dec 13, 2011)

edwardgtalbot said:


> I did hear a rumor about a Jedi round these here parts. Something about the name Dalglish.


I always figured him more the Scoundrel type....


----------



## Zelah Meyer (Jun 15, 2011)

I've asked myself whether Amazon will force authors to choose between going exclusive or not listing with them and decided that they wouldn't - because their model is based on having everything the customer is looking for.  If someone refuses to list with them when told they have to be exclusive to amazon, then there is a risk that customers will go to a competitor to buy that author's books and buy other stuff (that they could have bought on Amazon) while they're there.

They may make it so that there is a hefty divide in terms of visibility/sales/royalties between those who go exclusive and those who don't but they will want to make sure that, if a customer wants a book, they can find it on Amazon.


----------



## kea (Jun 13, 2011)

Ugh! It's stuff like this that makes me a horrible person to throw on a jury. I'm seeing so many pros and cons to opting in that my head is spinning. So many of you make good points. Obviously, it isn't as easy as counting up the pros and cons, either. I'm about to upload my e-books and now this is another wrench in the system. First book, first venture into all of this. Do I start off opting in or staying out? Ha! Just try to get me to think about my day job today!


----------



## Ian Fraser (Mar 8, 2011)

I think any short term benefits to indie writers is purely tactical on Amaon's part. First it controls the content, then it will probably eye the royalty fee structure, is my guess. Once it has a vast mass of content providers with nowhere else to go (at least not for three months), at some point its going to realize that its generous royalty figure could be adjusted and give them additional millions for no extra effort. 

The corporations are purely about profit, nothing else. Any accidental 'benefit' for writers is temporary. Amazon's making a land grab for content, and once its got the content, well, what's the herd going to do when it finds new fences and boundaries? Complain? Who cares? The majority will go along because they'll talk themselves into seeing whatever new temporary dangling carrot is produced, as a positive. 

Corporations care nothing for the individual human being. They exist purely to squeeze as much profit as possible. The old maxim: 'those who control the information flow, have all the power.' Well, Amazon is now in control of an increasing amount of creative work that no one else can sell, and its creators are locked in to it for three long months.

Currently Amazon are letting people persuade themselves to strip their products from competitors shelves and enter exclusivity deals. This won't be the end of it. Corporations will squeeze for profits as hard as they can. And in the case of self publishers, this will probably come down to seeing a future change in the royalty agreement. 

Amazon already have the herd penned in and reassuring themselves that these new fences aren't threatening. I guess when the next stage of the 'squeeze' comes, there'll be another dangling carrot - perhaps an even bigger money figure to appeal to those who can't do maths...


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

Ian Fraser said:


> Corporations care nothing for the individual human being. They exist purely to squeeze as much profit as possible. The old maxim: 'those who control the information flow, have all the power.' Well, Amazon is now in control of an increasing amount of creative work that no one else can sell, and its creators are locked in to it for three long months.
> 
> Currently Amazon are letting people persuade themselves to strip their products from competitors shelves and enter exclusivity deals. This won't be the end of it. Corporations will squeeze for profits as hard as they can. And in the case of self publishers, this will probably come down to seeing a future change in the royalty agreement.
> 
> Amazon already have the herd penned in and reassuring themselves that these new fences aren't threatening. I guess when the next stage of the 'squeeze' comes, there'll be another dangling carrot - perhaps an even bigger money figure to appeal to those who can't do maths...


Of course it won't be the end of it. So what? Sales on other platforms are already so anemic for most that Amazon doesn't need to get exclusivity to do whatever it wants to us. Choosing Amazon Select is going to make sense for some people and not others, but if you're on Amazon at all, you face essentially the same risks as do people on Amazon Select.

Believing that one can avoid being a member of the herd is no less of a delusion than the herd evaluating fences as non-threatening.


----------



## Guest (Dec 13, 2011)

edwardgtalbot said:


> Believing that one can avoid being a member of the herd is no less of a delusion than the herd evaluating fences as non-threatening.


This is only true if you base your marketing on a particular retail site and not building your own client base. Amazon actually accounts for very little of my overall business (though I do make a nice chunk of change on the affiliate program). I often hear people say that they only get sales on Amazon, but they don't actually stop and ask why that might be so. Maybe it is because the only link they ever promoted was the Amazon listing. Maybe it is because they only promoted on sites that have strong Amazon focus instead of general reader sites.

The thing is that, even with Amazon, each retailer attracts a certain demographic, and that demographic may not translate to all authors. I have one book that does extremely well on Kobo, but doesn't sell well elsewhere. But something about the book connects with that site's customers. I have a book with low sales everywhere but the Apple store. For whatever reason, those customers like that particular book. The reason why diversity in distribution is so essential to business survival is because you cannot dictate where your target demographic might shop.

The point being, I often wonder how much of the "I only sell on Amazon anyway" is actually organic customer behavior or self-fullfilling prophesy.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

modwitch said:


> I made 97% of my sales on Amazon. I'd argue that for 90% of authors here, Amazon already controls the content.
> 
> Mental experiment. Amazon drops royalties to 35% tomorrow. How many of you walk away? Did Select (in or out) really change that?


Darn right I wouldn't walk away. Would I jerk the couple of novels that are in Select out of it when those very short three months are over. You bet.

I have always linked to other retailers when I promote, but my own promotions aren't what sells my novels and I know it. Even though my novels have not cracked the top 5,000, Amazon does some promotion to readers for me and that is what sells most of my novels.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

modwitch said:


> I made 97% of my sales on Amazon. I'd argue that for 90% of authors here, Amazon already controls the content.
> 
> Mental experiment. Amazon drops royalties to 35% tomorrow. How many of you walk away? Did Select (in or out) really change that?


Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. What difference, really, is it if books are listed only on Amazon or on all platforms? For most of us it's like our books are exclusive, because they don't sell in appreciable volume elsewhere.

Your second point is what worries me about Amazon. Why should they continue to pay 70% to indies? What in the marketplace is driving that? People are not going to take down their books from Amazon if Amazon lowers the royalties.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> This is only true if you base your marketing on a particular retail site and not building your own client base.


Oh, I agree. I'm not saying it's impossible to make money without Amazon. But my remark was directed at comments that were not making a reasoned argument for not putting your eggs in one basket; rather they were inflammatory generalizations, and what little substance they contained would suggest that anyone who actually believed them should not be on Amazon at all.


----------



## Guest (Dec 13, 2011)

Asher MacDonald said:


> Your second point is what worries me about Amazon. Why should they continue to pay 70% to indies? What in the marketplace is driving that? People are not going to take down their books from Amazon if Amazon lowers the royalties.


I think this is a valid concern. Amazon went into the whole Kindle thing willing to lose money in the short run in order to profit in the long run. Before Kindle, the normal split with ebooks was similar to print, with retailers getting discounts of 40-60% off the retail price. Remember, initially Amazon didn't offer 70%. That came later as an incentive to get people to stop listing at 99 cents. The Amazon "idle price" is $2.99-$9.99, which is why you get the 70% deal. Remember, sell ABOVE $9.99, the deal goes back to 35%. Amazon can and will change the split however they want to preserve their profits now that they have a firm market base. Maybe they start charging a service fee for free listings. Maybe they drop the 99 cent percentage to 20%. Maybe they start giving preferential treatment to exclusive authors who get to keep their 70%, and everyone else gets dropped to 50-60%.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I think this is a valid concern. Amazon went into the whole Kindle thing willing to lose money in the short run in order to profit in the long run. Before Kindle, the normal split with ebooks was similar to print, with retailers getting discounts of 40-60% off the retail price. Remember, initially Amazon didn't offer 70%. That came later as an incentive to get people to stop listing at 99 cents. The Amazon "idle price" is $2.99-$9.99, which is why you get the 70% deal. Remember, sell ABOVE $9.99, the deal goes back to 35%. Amazon can and will change the split however they want to preserve their profits now that they have a firm market base. Maybe they start charging a service fee for free listings. Maybe they drop the 99 cent percentage to 20%. Maybe they start giving preferential treatment to exclusive authors who get to keep their 70%, and everyone else gets dropped to 50-60%.


The thing is, I don't have a crystal ball and can't predict what Amazon *might* do in the future. I can only base my actions on what Amazon is doing NOW. They might drop their royalty, or they might not. Nobody knows and I, for one, can't base what I do on idle speculation.

Right now, Amazon has the best royalty and the best algorithm game in town. I intend to be in that game for as long as they remain the best. I'll deal with the future when it gets here.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I think this is a valid concern. Amazon went into the whole Kindle thing willing to lose money in the short run in order to profit in the long run. Before Kindle, the normal split with ebooks was similar to print, with retailers getting discounts of 40-60% off the retail price. Remember, initially Amazon didn't offer 70%. * That came later as an incentive to get people to stop listing at 99 cents. *The Amazon "idle price" is $2.99-$9.99, which is why you get the 70% deal. Remember, sell ABOVE $9.99, the deal goes back to 35%. Amazon can and will change the split however they want to preserve their profits now that they have a firm market base.


Uh, no.

When the iBookstore launched, it was launching with similar terms for a lot of their apps and electronics: 70% royalty rate. The iBookstore was all the talk, everyone was doom and gloom for Kindle, and then two weeks later Amazon announced the new 70% royalty rate for their own KDP program. They didn't do it to wipe out 99 cent books, they did it as a response to a serious competitor (which is why, no matter how bad you sell on the iBookstore, you can be happy for their very existence). The $2.99-$9.99 was a secondary affect, a way to gain something they wanted since they were making a concession. Amazon wanted nearly every new, major book to be $9.99 (hence the agency showdown), so that ceiling is obvious. They also made the digital have to be 20% cheaper than print, another shot against publishers. The $2.99 floor is something that you could probably debate about a bit more, but I think they wanted to add an incentive to avoid the race to the bottom...either that, or prevent them from hypothetically losing money on every 99 cent transaction.


----------



## Guest (Dec 13, 2011)

modwitch said:


> Naive enough to believe it's possible to have a well-thought-out difference of opinion without it automatically rendering my judgment incapacitated in some way .
> 
> I think I hear what you're saying. You believe that the biggest factor affecting our long-term success as authors is viable, healthy competition amongst ebook retailers. Anything done to undermine that might look good now, but it's a disaster for the future. Am I close?
> 
> Can you do the same thing for the case I'm making - a nice, reasonable summary that doesn't presume stupidity on my part? You don't have to agree. I'm just curious if you're listening .


You got it down cold, Witchywoman. If I weren't listening I couldn't have quoted you, eh? You think it will benefit you to enroll big time in Select; that most of your sales are in Amzn. Mine too, but any benefit I'd get would be short term and help Amzn to shut out competition. Not exactly a Soviet State, but still not in any way I can see a long term benefit for nearly all indies. If this keeps up the name of my next novel will be, "Dark Amazon."


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

You know what would really help foster strong competition for Amazon? The competition.

If Kobo made it easy to self-publish on their site.
If iTunes didn't require a Mac and had even the most bare bones upgrade to their non-existent browsing system.
If BN fixed a search that's crippled and category mapped even a little.
If any of them offered more promotional tools.

None of them have done this? If they want to fight Amazon, they have to improve first.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

Monique said:


> You know what would really help foster strong competition for Amazon? The competition.
> 
> If Kobo made it easy to self-publish on their site.
> If iTunes didn't require a Mac and had even the most bare bones upgrade to their non-existent browsing system.
> ...


You're right. And I'm convinced they don't WANT to fight Amazon for indies. B&N and Apple at least are not interested in sacrificing their relationships with the large publishers to do so. Kobo - they seem simply unable to do so (which I hope may be changing).

Competition inevitably degrades, as a myriad of factors interfere with the theoretical path of the invisible hand. The discussion of exactly how that's happening here could get long, but it certainly is happening and at a high level, it's Econ 101 type stuff. In one sense, Amazon has essentially created a market for readers who don't even know they want until they are presented with buying options by Amazon. No one else is creating anything close to that market, and that's where my income comes from. The fact that other markets exist does not mean that choosing to go after them stimulates anything resembling competition.


----------



## marshacanham (Jul 30, 2010)

MikeAngel said:


> You got it down cold, Witchywoman. If I weren't listening I couldn't have quoted you, eh? You think it will benefit you to enroll big time in Select; that most of your sales are in Amzn. Mine too, but *any benefit I'd get would be short term and help Amzn to shut out competition*. Not exactly a Soviet State, but still not in any way I can see a long term benefit for nearly all indies. If this keeps up the name of my next novel will be, "Dark Amazon."


I've been reading all the pros and cons with interest. I had already enrolled three books with the Select program and by doing so I don't see myself as helping Amazon wipe out Apple, Sony, Kobo, or Smashwords. That is, in effect, what most of the naysayers are trying to...er...naysay? That Amazon will grow powerful enough to wipe out Apple? Hmm. I kinda think that would take waaaaaay more plotting and planning than offering exclusivity to their Prime members. For that reason also, as the Jedi Warrior explained, they won't alter the 70% royalty...not unless Apple does so first. And think about it, if it wasn't for the iPad, would there even be a Kindle Fire? When the iPad came along, there were gnashings of teeth all over the place spelling doom for Amazon and the Kindle.

It's competition. It's who thinks of the next clever idea first. And it's up to the guys left in second and third place to come up with something that shoots them ahead into first place. We're just along for the ride, and so far it's a pretty damned good ride.


----------



## Kevis Hendrickson (Feb 28, 2009)

Monique said:


> You know what would really help foster strong competition for Amazon? The competition.
> 
> If Kobo made it easy to self-publish on their site.
> If iTunes didn't require a Mac and had even the most bare bones upgrade to their non-existent browsing system.
> ...


Competition? What competition? Oh, if you mean those retailers where you upload your book for sale and PRAY someone discovers it...


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

I worked really hard to implant my own. I will not be giving one back, not for any reason


----------



## Guest (Dec 13, 2011)

> It's competition. It's who thinks of the next clever idea first. And it's up to the guys left in second and third place to come up with something that shoots them ahead into first place. We're just along for the ride, and so far it's a pretty damned good ride.


Yeah. Just like Select is anti-competition. You've got your eye on the prize but you seem to be contradicting yourself with your acquiesence to Select.


----------



## Kevis Hendrickson (Feb 28, 2009)

modwitch said:


> I hear sacrificing right testicles works too. Alas, I have none.


Too painful. I'd rather sacrifice a young goat. Then again, I might have tried that already.


----------



## Guest (Dec 13, 2011)

modwitch said:


> I hear sacrificing right testicles works too. Alas, I have none.


It would seem that the result--oh, varies.


----------



## marshacanham (Jul 30, 2010)

MikeAngel said:


> Yeah. Just like Select is anti-competition. You've got your eye on the prize but you seem to be contradicting yourself with your acquiesence to Select.


I didn't acquiesce. I signed up voluntarily. Three books out of 14...that leaves me with enough to keep the *competition* healthy, and enough to see where the Select program goes and IF it is of any benefit to ME. If it isn't, I can reverse my choice at the end of 90 days. If it is...well...I'll stay in it. Frankly, the fewer people who sign up for it, the better for the ones who do. That too is a form of competition.

And really, everyone is just speculating right now. The program is less than two weeks old. IF it shows appreciable success for the authors who have enrolled,(and doesn't bring about the downfall of Apple, Sony, B&N etc) I wonder how many of those who haven't done so will be signing up in March?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

I'm amazed by the notion that independents are such a market force today that competitors are able to quash each other by attracting them. The fate of these companies depends on how many independents they sell? Now, that's progress. Anyone know what percentage of the market is represented by independents?

Apple, B&N, Google, and Kobo have been making so much money from independents that losing them will sink their ships?


----------



## ETS PRESS (Nov 4, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I'm amazed by the notion that independents are such a market force today that competitors are able to quash each other by attracting them. The fate of these companies depends on how many independents they sell? Anyone know what percentage of the market is represented by independents?


That would be something, wouldn't it?


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I'm amazed by the notion that independents are such a market force today that competitors are able to quash each other by attracting them. The fate of these companies depends on how many independents they sell? Now, that's progress. Anyone know what percentage of the market is represented by independents?


Indies are between 5-10 percent of the market I read just recently. Can't recall where, but it might've been the NY Times. It was an establishment type place so could be an undercount as they are wont to do.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Eric C said:


> Indies are between 5-10 percent of the market I read just recently. Can't recall where, but it might've been the NY Times. It was an establishment type place so could be an undercount as they are wont to do.


Of the overall book market, paper and ebook, or of the ebook market, or of the Kindle market? My guess would be the latter.


----------



## Benjamin A. (Oct 1, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I'm amazed by the notion that independents are such a market force today that competitors are able to quash each other by attracting them. The fate of these companies depends on how many independents they sell? Now, that's progress. Anyone know what percentage of the market is represented by independents?


It's not the force they are today, but what they could be tomorrow. People want more for less every day that goes by. Self-publishing definitely decreases costs, since I don't have an entire staff under my direction. Just little old me. Should one of the e-retailers choose to champion these books, it could be quite a force indeed. If you looked at any other market, and offered comparable products for $0.99-$2.99 and $9.99-$14.99, eventually people will realize they're getting ripped off with the latter. Especially when people are pointing out that even the traditionally published books have errors and such too, and they seem to be increasing. Not just in books either, but other commercial items.

Commercial advertising/appeal, and readers' feelings on indie publications vs. big publishing houses are what hold the current publishing structure in place. Should those fall... Well, the market may very well be driven by a new force, instead of big publishing. Just conjecture though.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"It's not the force they are today, but what they could be tomorrow."_

Could be. Makes me wonder if Apple, B&N, Google, and Kobo agree. Their behavior doesn't indicate they do. But, like Amazon, none of them call to confide.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

modwitch said:


> I hear sacrificing right testicles works too. Alas, I have none.


Well now.

No need for an "alas," testicles are overrated. Not that I have any plans (immediate or otherwise) to make the sacrifice.


----------



## Guest (Dec 14, 2011)

marshacanham said:


> I didn't acquiesce. I signed up voluntarily. Three books out of 14...that leaves me with enough to keep the *competition* healthy, and enough to see where the Select program goes and IF it is of any benefit to ME. If it isn't, I can reverse my choice at the end of 90 days. If it is...well...I'll stay in it. Frankly, the fewer people who sign up for it, the better for the ones who do. That too is a form of competition.
> 
> And really, everyone is just speculating right now. The program is less than two weeks old. IF it shows appreciable success for the authors who have enrolled,(and doesn't bring about the downfall of Apple, Sony, B&N etc) I wonder how many of those who haven't done so will be signing up in March?


You're missing the main point. Amazon is using incentives to get you to flush their competitors. No one is saying it will be their downfall, but it surely doesn't boost competition to use predatory practices. The fact that you can sticky your leg in the water up to any point you choose (how many books you put in Select) and can also yank it back out later, is also not to the main point--that is, _by using Select you are going along with the exclusivity that amounts to predatory business practice._


----------



## Guest (Dec 14, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I'm amazed by the notion that independents are such a market force today ....


It isn't about indies. Its about a cheap volume of content. Content is the currency of the internet. Doesn't even matter if the majority of customers are still going to buy the "bestsellers." Amazon doesn't remain Amazon by saying "We have the lowest prices on the one hundred books people actually buy."

Last year WalMart got rid of around a thousand products from its shelves that were low volume in order to give more shelf space to the products people were actually buying. The theory was that if they bought more volume of the items people DID buy and stopped stocking the low-selling items, they could reduce their prices even more and increase profits at the same time. Makes sense on the surface. Makes sense until WalMart lost significant market share. Come to find out people like having the choice, even if they decide to buy the same thing all the time. So Walmart started to stock all of those underperforming products again. Market share got back to normal, but people still bought the same fast moving products and the slow sellers remained on the shelves.

Now look at what Amazon is doing. They are grabbing content. They don't care about the quality of the content so long as they have a lot of it. They don't care how well any individual title sells so long as they have thousands of them available. It is a psychological thing to give the appearance of options. Indies are not a "market force" but replaceable commodities to Amazon.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Now look at what Amazon is doing. They are grabbing content. They don't care about the quality of the content so long as they have a lot of it. They don't care how well any individual title sells so long as they have thousands of them available. It is a psychological thing to give the appearance of options. Indies are not a "market force" but replaceable commodities to Amazon."_

So Amazon quashes by getting low quality books to move off competitors and onto Amazon? World's largest selection of unedited and poorly formatted dreck? A monopoly on crap? The more their customers are jarred, irritated and annoyed, the more money they make? That's going to drive Apple, B&N, Google, and Kobo out of business?


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

No, but it does drive people to buy the far more expensive books that read like books in the bookstore.


----------



## Sam Rivers (May 22, 2011)

> Yeah. Just like Select is anti-competition. You've got your eye on the prize but you seem to be contradicting yourself with your acquiesence to Select


I think what is really bothering you is that you can't use price matching anymore since KDP Select has ruined it for you. KDP Select now allows you to put as many of your books on free as you want. That can't be good for the old price matchers.

I like KDP Select and plan to offer a free book every day until New Years. Those authors that don't go along with KDP Select will find themselves standing by the train station as the rest of us pull out on the train.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

MikeAngel said:


> _by using Select you are going along with the exclusivity that amounts to predatory business practice._


You're kidding, right? Why draw the line here? Every major corporation in the country has equally predatory practices. They may try harder to hide it, but that actually makes it worse. Chances are excellent that the very device people are using to connect to the internet here is created by a company that engages in predatory practices.

Maybe you consider the exclusivity a worse predatory practice. That's fine. The fact that we don't doesn't mean we're missing the point, it just means we don't agree with you about its significance.

Or maybe for some it simply means "Darn straight I am. Any corporation worth its bylaws would do it, and I'm already at a big enough disadvantage to corporations in our system as it is."


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Content is the currency of the internet.


Hit the nail on the head. It's the information age, and what would that be without information? It doesn't matter whether it's good or bad or indiferent. That's for the market to decide. The net needs a constant flow of content in order to keep people interested and that's what companies like Apple and Amazon understand and Microsoft and Newscorp don't.

Note: The following is a little off topic, but I can't seem to help myself...

You can actually see the progression of info need as technology evolved. Start at the begining of televion (for the sake of argument) television wasn't ubiquitous, there were few channels and many closed overnight (those old enough will remember the ol' test pattern). There were some movies, the odd variety show and a nightly news broadcast. When television became more common and colour, more channels stayed open longer and there was a need to fill in all that extra time. This led to more comprehensive news broadcasts more often, and sitcoms, gameshows, soaps etc evolved to help fill the void. Cable came out, television became 24/7 and news went from two or three times a day to 24/7 on some channels. Internet came on line. Some print info at first then, as tech evolved, video streaming, social networking (remember Geocities?) online games, etc. Now we have wireless devices that can hold the equivalent of 3000 books. The question is, where are all these books going to come from? In a short space of time (30yrs) the internet has exploded the amount of info that people can consume in a day and it's got to come from somewhere.


----------



## marshacanham (Jul 30, 2010)

MikeAngel said:


> You're missing the main point. Amazon is using incentives to get you to flush their competitors. No one is saying it will be their downfall, but it surely doesn't boost competition to use predatory practices. The fact that you can sticky your leg in the water up to any point you choose (how many books you put in Select) and can also yank it back out later, is also not to the main point--that is, _by using Select you are going along with the exclusivity that amounts to predatory business practice._


LOL I'm not missing any point, trust me. I've been in this business for thirty years. I've seen all kinds of points come and go as well as the people making them, and the people trying to tell me I'm missing them. I could bore you for hours telling you how cyclical this business is, pendulums swinging back and forth...but then you might miss the point *grin*


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Can someone tell us what predatory business practices are? The term is becoming quite popular in these threads.


----------



## Mr. Coffee Snob (Jun 27, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Can someone tell us what predatory business practices are? The term is becoming quite popular in these threads.


I can. If it works against you, it's predatory (even if it works well for others). If it works in your favor, however, it's totally fair.


----------



## Todd Young (May 2, 2011)

Having read the entire thread, the only thing I can add is:

1. People's expectations (and disparagement) of Smashwords are a little difficult to square with the fact that it is a company with fewer than ten staff, and one that has only recently become profitable.

2. A Prime member might be unlikely to loan an indie book priced at $2.99 or below when they can borrow a more expensive book.


----------



## Sam Rivers (May 22, 2011)

> I can. If it works against you, it's predatory (even if it works well for others). If it works in your favor, however, it's totally fair.


I think price matching was predatory.


----------



## Guest (Dec 14, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Can someone tell us what predatory business practices are? The term is becoming quite popular in these threads.


Predatory Pricing

From my business class days, a predatory business practice is a practice that is designed to put a smaller rival out of business by interfering in the rival's ability to conduct business. In people terms, it is the difference between training hard for a marathon in order to win or tripping your rival as he tries to pass you in the race.

Exclusivity deals in and of themselves are not predatory per se. A lot of stores have exclusive deals with certain vendors. In the case of companies like Apple and BN, the impact is nominal because they still have a large inventory of books from the trad industry to peddle, and the bulk of their business is trad book sales, not indies.

But in the case of a company like Smashwords, which built its infrastructure completely around supporting indies, stripping them of the ability to have indies in their inventory is interferring in their ability to conduct business by effectively cutting them off from their suppliers without warning.


----------



## JimC1946 (Aug 6, 2009)

Realistically, about 99% of my sales are at Amazon. I unpublished at Smashwords and joined Select. I hated to do it, but for me it seemed to make sense.


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

"Indies are not a "market force" but replaceable commodities to Amazon."  Yes, sad but true.  Just ask the Amazon Shorts people, if you can find any.


----------



## scottnicholson (Jan 31, 2010)

Two observations I will call "guesses" just to avoid any possibility of different opinions, because they are meaningless guesses and aren't helpful at all.

1. Amazon does NOT care which books are selling the best. They make just as much money on any of them, all things being relatively equal and prices averaging out among all the top sellers. Even the books under their imprint--really, it's just a file they are transferring for cash.

2. This is not only a good move for Amazon, but it also strengthened the other markets, too. I doubt those markets will feel the effects of 100,000 lost titles. I doubt a customer is going to dump their Nook to go buy a Kindle because they can't get a certain indie author anymore. Mostly because those customers don't even know we exist.

One file is as good as another. And, here's another guess, for most readers, one writer in the genre is just as good as another. If you are not in the market, there are thousands more like you and like me. The stream flows on.


----------



## melissafmiller (Feb 17, 2011)

I honestly can't see how people like me, who remove books that weren't selling, are going to cripple Smashwords.  Even if lots of people do it.  Lots of books that aren't selling don't make Mark any more money than one book that's not selling.

And, when I say not selling, I mean it.  The book I took down had, in just under eight months, accrued 2 sales on Smashwords, and fewer than 15 on all other sites in premium distribution (not counting B&N, which I had published to directly).  Mostly, I was just a leech, a drain on Smashwords' resources with my LibraryThing giveaway and free coupon.

The book had more borrows the first day it was in the lending library than it had sales during the entire time it was on Smashwords.  Now, a week in, I have just about as many borrows as I had sales in eight months on B&N.  (I also sell significantly more paperbacks of that book at $14.99 than I sold copies through Smashwords.)

If it were selling on other sites---or if I had reason to think it wouldn't sell better on Amazon---I wouldn't have removed it. Case in point, my set of two crime fiction shorts sells a handful of copies through Smashwords and more, but not much more, on Amazon.  I didn't unpublish it.  Why would I?  But a book that sells more than 400 copies on Amazon for every 1 copy elsewhere?  Yeah, I think it's worth it to give Select a 90-day trial.

I respect Mark and I hope Smashwords succeeds, despite the ugliness of the meatgrinder, the horror of trying to navigate the site, and the black hole that is customer service.  In fairness, though, let's not paint Smashwords as a charity.  Didn't Smashwords recently make a special agents' only space so books published by literary agents didn't have to sit on a cyber shelf next to stinky old self-published books where they might get cooties?  I didn't hear a lot of outrage about that.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

melissafmiller said:


> I honestly can't see how people like me, who remove books that weren't selling, are going to cripple Smashwords. Even if lots of people do it. Lots of books that aren't selling don't make Mark any more money than one book that's not selling.
> 
> And, when I say not selling, I mean it. The book I took down had, in just under eight months, accrued 2 sales on Smashwords, and fewer than 15 on all other sites in premium distribution (not counting B&N, which I had published to directly). Mostly, I was just a leech, a drain on Smashwords' resources with my LibraryThing giveaway and free coupon.
> 
> ...


That's how I felt. I sometimes felt guilty if I made a change, like adding links to the back of my book, and having to re-upload to Smashwords, where it would then have to be re-distributed again to the premium channels. Here I was causing more work, and my books brought in very little money there. In the long run, I think this will make things easier for Smashwords. The people who remain did so because their books are selling. That's good for them and Smashwords. Those of us who left (for now, anyway) seem to be the ones who couldn't sell with them. We won't be cluttering up the meatgrinder or premium catalog anymore.


----------



## Guest (Dec 14, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Predatory Pricing
> 
> From my business class days, a predatory business practice is a practice that is designed to put a smaller rival out of business by interfering in the rival's ability to conduct business. In people terms, it is the difference between training hard for a marathon in order to win or tripping your rival as he tries to pass you in the race.
> 
> ...


Julie--thanks for posting this as I was about to wax eloquent to answer.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Exclusivity deals in and of themselves are not predatory per se. A lot of stores have exclusive deals with certain vendors. In the case of companies like Apple and BN, the impact is nominal because they still have a large inventory of books from the trad industry to peddle, and the bulk of their business is trad book sales, not indies.

But in the case of a company like Smashwords, which built its infrastructure completely around supporting indies, stripping them of the ability to have indies in their inventory is interferring in their ability to conduct business by effectively cutting them off from their suppliers without warning. "_

Let's use that description. Exclusivity would be predatory if it was targeted at one player only, and not B&N and Apple. I'd add Sony, too. As you say, the impact on those firms is nominal. Since they are the major players, we can say the impact of the action in the economy is nominal. Amazon did not condition membership in Prime Select on dropping one and only one player. They did not say drop just one company, but it's OK to stay with B&N, Apple, and Sony.

Note the link you provide says, _"The predatory merchant then has fewer competitors or is even a de facto monopoly, and hypothetically could then raise prices above what the market would otherwise bear."_ We can see Amazon has competitors, and they include some of the largest and most powerful firms on the planet.

I also have to question the impact of this on weak players. I don't know what it is. Amazon shows 48,000 books in Prime Select. How many did the weak players have last week? How many were removed? If we don't know that, how do we even judge the impact?

So, when the effect of an action has varying impacts, it's hard to say it is targeted at one firm. It may have a major effect on one firm, but the market is not defined by the weakest participant. If that were the case, then no company could take any action if the weakest player in the market found it detrimental.

We are not limited to basing each business decisions on the impact it will have on the weakest player in the market. And if the weakest payer is impacted, that impact does not define predatory practice.


----------



## Todd Young (May 2, 2011)

Can somebody answer this question for me: Are books from the big six publishers included in the Select program? Without the exclusivity clause?

The second thing I'd like to know is whether people think simply unpublishing at Smashwords means you are okay to sign up for Select. Wouldn't you have to wait for your books to be pulled from the outlets you to distribute to?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Can somebody answer this question for me: Are books from the big six publishers included in the Select program? Without the exclusivity clause?"_

It's an interesting story. As I understand it, Amazon initially wanted to put Big-6 books in Select, and wanted to pay the full royalty each time one of them was borrowed. The Big-6 refused. Then Amazon then opened it up to KDP. So, now KDP books are sitting in slots that Amazon intended for Big-6.

I didn't read anything about exclusivity for Big-6. I very much doubt that was a condition. We can see that _Hunger Games_ is in select and is also for sale on B&N. Scholastic is the publisher, not Big-6, and they are not using KDP. (I'm open to correction on all this if someone has better info.)

One of these threads has an email from Amazon saying they understand the delays in getting books taken down, but want the author to take all steps necessary to do that before choosing Select. Then it's Ok to be on Select even if the book is still with another vendor.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

The way I'd put it is, no, the Big 6 aren't included in Select for the simple reason that the program is "KDP Select" and the Big 6 don't use KDP.

Terrence is right, they originally wanted the Big 6 the the lending library, and I'm certain they wouldn't have asked for exclusivity.  I don't know anything one way or the other about paying full royalty, but I expect Terrence is right about that as well.

Regarding authors taking "all the necessary steps" to get a book taken down, I am one of the people who received that email from KDP in response to me asking the question about how long I have to wait


----------



## Guest (Dec 15, 2011)

I've actually been getting an occasional sale at Smashwords over the past few days. I think Mark Coker is doing it to make sure I don't take any more books away.


----------



## Kevis Hendrickson (Feb 28, 2009)

foreverjuly said:


> I've actually been getting an occasional sale at Smashwords over the past few days. I think Mark Coker is doing it to make sure I don't take any more books away.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

edwardgtalbot said:


> The way I'd put it is, no, the Big 6 aren't included in Select for the simple reason that the program is "KDP Select" and the Big 6 don't use KDP.
> 
> Terrence is right, they originally wanted the Big 6 the the lending library, and I'm certain they wouldn't have asked for exclusivity. I don't know anything one way or the other about paying full royalty, but I expect Terrence is right about that as well.
> 
> Regarding authors taking "all the necessary steps" to get a book taken down, I am one of the people who received that email from KDP in response to me asking the question about how long I have to wait


I believe it's the old agency pricing bugaboo at work. Amazon is simply not allowed to change the price of books under the agency pricing agreement. I believe with some books, probably Hunger Games, for example, Amazon is changing the price to zero for the lend but still paying the publisher, Scholastic, the wholesale price. Apparently some publishers who sell at wholesale rates to Amazon are not happy about this but Amazon is interpreting the agreement in a way that allows them to change the price, even if they reduce the price to zero.

The big six publishers think that this devalues books. That's another way of saying they think that consumers will get to cheaper prices and, good lord, we can't let that happen.


----------



## Guest (Dec 15, 2011)

Asher MacDonald said:


> Hunger Games, for example, Amazon is changing the price to zero for the lend but still paying the publisher, Scholastic, the wholesale price. Apparently some publishers who sell at wholesale rates to Amazon are not happy about this but Amazon is interpreting the agreement in a way that allows them to change the price, even if they reduce the price to zero.


That is how normal wholesale pricing is suppose to work. The retailer pays you X for the product, and then can sell it for whatever they want so long as they don't play games with the retail list price (i.e. you can't say a $13.99 book is actually $15.99 and then place it on sale for $13.99). This is actually how most of us that used a distributor to feed Amazon in the past were paid. We only got 50% of the sale, but if Amazon decided to price match or sell a book for zero, they still had to pay us the same amount of money. If Amazon wanted to sell one of my $4.99 books for $2.99 (which they did on several occassions) they still had to pay me $2.49. And I would always see a boost in sales when they did that because of the psychology of a sale. The list price was still $4.99, thus retaining the inherent value of the book, and the temporary sales price enticed people to buy immediately.

I was most unamused when Amazon forced small published into KDP and stopped accepting feeds from a lot of the distributors.


----------



## indieview (Nov 6, 2011)

Blog post responding to Mark Coker's article in the Huffington Post.

http://www.theindieview.com/2011/12/17/step-up-or-shut-up/


----------



## Sam Rivers (May 22, 2011)

> Blog post responding to Mark Coker's article in the Huffington Post.
> 
> http://www.theindieview.com/2011/12/17/step-up-or-shut-up/


That is an excellent article and worth reading. I put a link to it on my blog.


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2011)

This makes no sense:



> the meatgrinder. We know to format for it - not a big deal. But in this day and age it is irrelevant. Readers can download a DRM free epub and do what they want with the file, to the specifications of their ereader - end of story. Anything else is just complicated.


So is he really saying that authors should not have to worry about making sure the book is formatted correctly, because customers should be responsible for doing that? Maybe in that author's happy little universe, all readers are both willing to take the time to format a file for their reader and have the skill to do so. But in the real world, customers are lazy and take the path of least resistance. In the real world, half the population has only basic computer skill (they can turn the thing on and figure out how to get online). I have co-workers who can't figure out how I put a Christmas tree image in the body of an email I sent out about the upcoming office party. I'm really suppose to expect them to reformat a epub file?

I all honesty, if the AUTHOR can't format the file to get through the meatgrinder, why would we expect customers to be able to do it? What am I missing?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"In the real world, half the population has only basic computer skill (they can turn the thing on and figure out how to get online). I have co-workers who can't figure out how I put a Christmas tree image in the body of an email I sent out about the upcoming office party. I'm really suppose to expect them to reformat a epub file?"_

I have lots of computer skills, but I'm still too lazy to fool with formatting a book from one vendor when I can click once and get it from another.


----------



## GerrieFerrisFinger (Jun 1, 2011)

My sales come largely from Amazon with some from B&N. I've recently put my indie originals on Smashwords and have a few sales. I would not sign on for KDP Select because I don't like the monopolistic attitude of Amazon. I know it's the capitalistic way: Crush the Competition, but I don't like it.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> So is he really saying that authors should not have to worry about making sure the book is formatted correctly, because customers should be responsible for doing that? Maybe in that author's happy little universe, all readers are both willing to take the time to format a file for their reader and have the skill to do so. But in the real world, customers are lazy and take the path of least resistance. In the real world, half the population has only basic computer skill (they can turn the thing on and figure out how to get online). I have co-workers who can't figure out how I put a Christmas tree image in the body of an email I sent out about the upcoming office party. I'm really suppose to expect them to reformat a epub file?
> 
> I all honesty, if the AUTHOR can't format the file to get through the meatgrinder, why would we expect customers to be able to do it? What am I missing?


You're not missing anything, you're dead right. Although I do think there were some good points in the article, this wasn't one of them. I'm a computer guy by trade, but a year after getting an Android Phone, I _still_ haven't taken the time to get my music from Itunes onto it. So I have to bring both my phone and my Ipod to various places. Stupid, but the extra couple steps to synch music from Itunes to android just hasn't been something I've taken the time to do. Most customers will take the path of least resistance unless they perceive the alternative as providing significant added value.

I've said it before - Smashwords has focused the lion's share of its efforts on distribution, not selling on its site. I have no problem with that choice, so any changes I'd like to see are limited to improving the non-retail side of the business (epub upload, etc)


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

As threads build, and people report their experiences with Select, it seems Amazon has provided a tool many past threads have identified as a need for authors. Books can be set to free on a specific date for a specific time. Amazon has responded as they asked.

However, Amazon didn't give it away. The price is the exclusivity. Many authors who have few sales outside of Amazon don't see that as a significant price. The benefit to them greatly exceeds the cost. It's the free market at work.


----------



## indieview (Nov 6, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> This makes no sense:
> 
> So is he really saying that authors should not have to worry about making sure the book is formatted correctly...
> I all honesty, if the AUTHOR can't format the file to get through the meatgrinder, why would we expect customers to be able to do it? What am I missing?


No. That is NOT what he is saying. What he said was - we KNOW how to format for meatgrinder - it isn't a big deal. What he thinks is that the vast majority of the world read in two formats epub or mobi. Because KDP accepts an epub file (formatted correctly, duh), Smashwords can get rid of all teh other options and therefore the meatgrinder and just go with a properly formatted epub.

That's what he said.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

indieview said:


> No. That is NOT what he is saying. What he said was - we KNOW how to format for meatgrinder - it isn't a big deal.


You're right. I would take issue with the observation, however. Getting a book through the meatgrinder with anything beyond very basic formatting its a big deal. I just reformatted the one of my six ebooks that I am going to enroll in Select, and I was able to put some nice little touches in it that I wouldn't dare try with the meatgrinder. It's not that they couldn't eventually work in most cases, but numerous hours of inefficient trial and error with little or no useful feedback from the automated meatgrinder would almost certainly be required.

This is not something that will make me stop using Smashwords. I do not plan to enroll my full length novels into Select. But it is quite frankly a huge pain to use the meatgrinder.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Paul Clayton said:


> "Indies are not a "market force" but replaceable commodities to Amazon." Yes, sad but true. Just ask the Amazon Shorts people, if you can find any.


Indies maybe a replaceable commodity but so are all authors, indie or not. Indies to the traditional bookstores aren't even "real books or authors". So its okay to lump me in as a replacable commodity.


----------



## indieview (Nov 6, 2011)

edwardgtalbot said:


> You're right. I would take issue with the observation, however. Getting a book through the meatgrinder with anything beyond very basic formatting its a big deal. I just reformatted the one of my six ebooks that I am going to enroll in Select, and I was able to put some nice little touches in it that I wouldn't dare try with the meatgrinder. It's not that they couldn't eventually work in most cases, but numerous hours of inefficient trial and error with little or no useful feedback from the automated meatgrinder would almost certainly be required.
> 
> This is not something that will make me stop using Smashwords. I do not plan to enroll my full length novels into Select. But it is quite frankly a huge pain to use the meatgrinder.


Yes, I agree with you. The "it's not a big deal" comment was really directed at killing off the "it is easy to format for meatgrinder response". Actually I have a guy in Slovakia that has built a macro for meatgrinder that works every time (so for me it isn't a big deal - load file, run macro).

The point was in this day and age. meatgrinder and the resulting gazzillion formats isn't required. Just let us load an epub (and then we can make our books look prettier ). And yep the meatgrinder is a huge pain which is why I am for getting rid of it.

I did get a response from Mark on this and Mark tells me that the epub upload option should be available late 2012.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Indies maybe a replaceable commodity but so are all authors, indie or not. Indies to the traditional bookstores aren't even "real books or authors". So its okay to lump me in as a replacable commodity."_

Sure they are replaceable. I know I am. Big deal. Who considers themselves irreplaceable?


----------



## Guest (Dec 19, 2011)

In my opinion, in the last 4 years Amazon has opened more doors for new authors than any bookstore, agency, major press, or publishing outlet out there. No one else has lifted a finger in the 12 years I've been actively pursuing a writing career. Profit is clearly Amazon's motive, but I'm happy to go along with them as they attempt to corner the market. They're doing a lot of things right while the rest of the industry (publishers, bookstores, agents, and magazines like The New Yorker) stagnate.


----------



## indieview (Nov 6, 2011)

Attebery said:


> In my opinion, in the last 4 years Amazon has opened more doors for new authors than any bookstore, agency, major press, or publishing outlet out there. No one else has lifted a finger in the 12 years I've been actively pursuing a writing career. Profit is clearly Amazon's motive, but I'm happy to go along with them as they attempt to corner the market. They're doing a lot of things right while the rest of the industry (publishers, bookstores, agents, and magazines like The New Yorker) stagnate.


Agreed, but Smashwords has also opened doors for indies and I thank Mark for that. As an international author it would be virtually impossible for me to be on B&N were it not for Smashwords. But I do agree particularly with the last line of your statement. What I would like is for Smashwords, B&N, iBookstore, Kobo and, yes, even Sony , to lift their game and compete. The point of the article's response was to say, "stop whining about what Amazon is doing to you", and start focusing on what you can do to Amazon. i.e. Compete with technology, service, innovation and smart business acumen - not with "warnings". Particularly when those warnings contain a lot of wishy-washy vagueness and wishful thinking.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"Indies maybe a replaceable commodity but so are all authors, indie or not. Indies to the traditional bookstores aren't even "real books or authors". So its okay to lump me in as a replacable commodity."_
> 
> Sure they are replaceable. I know I am. Big deal. Who considers themselves irreplaceable?


I think some of my readers do.


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

So... Here's a sort of sideways thought to this whole subject of Amazon trying to dominate their competition that I have always wondered...

Since amazon in general has not shown much hesitation in selling competing products (for instance, they continue to sell books by other publishers besides their own imprints and they allow sellers of the exact products that they themselves offer directly), why don't they also sell ePub (and other) files of ebooks?

Don't have a kindle? Well, that's okay!  You can still buy your favorite ebook here!

Or... Your silly-relative only heard the "ereader" part of your holiday wish list and now you're blessed with a reader that you dreaded would lock you out of amazon's stock for years?  Well, fear no more! We will sell you the format of your choice!  And, if your favorite author isn't offering it? Just let us know and we'll send them a polite request to upload it to our store as well.

~_~ooo

I obviously understand that they want to take as large a share of the market as they can with their own devices.  What company wouldn't?  But is that really the only thing stopping them from offering other versions/formats?

I mean, if the select program does manage to drive off some of the competing devices, perhaps even actually put them out of business (which I doubt would happen simply from indie exclusivity), there would still be a lot of potential customers who wouldn't or couldn't run out and purchase a kindle to fill the void in the interim of those product demises.  Those people could also be a crowd of angry consumers now left with ebook purchases that they would never be able to conviently switch to the enemy device that made their original choice a dead end.  Granted, there's always Calibre conversin, but the reading public are neither all going to want to do it nor necessarily technologically savvy enough (as sad as that may seem) to do it.

Wouldn't it be convenient if Amazon could sweep in and say, "Have no fear! We'll sell your version here too!" At least for the interim?

Also, I'm sure a lot of authors wouldn't mind the additional ease of convenience (for uploading, reporting, and recieving payments), not to mention sales growth, they could potentially achieve simply by being able to upload both mobi and ePub (and others) all in one place.

(Um... Smashwords... Don't hate me for mentioning that part... Since you already offer all formats in one place on top of distributing to multiple channels as well. ~_~ooo Not that little ol' me is of any import to them for them to even notice that I'd made such a query.)

So... What do y'all think?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"I obviously understand that they want to take as large a share of the market as they can with their own devices. What company wouldn't? But is that really the only thing stopping them from offering other versions/formats?"_

That seems like a pretty good reason.


----------



## Mr. Coffee Snob (Jun 27, 2011)

Note: _Previous statement was deleted because I feel like I'm repeating myself._

New Statement: Eat more turkey this Christmas and less pie. Turkey is low carb, right?


----------



## MarkCoker (Feb 15, 2009)

Robert E. Keller said:


> My belief is that Smashwords cares less about whether or not I succeed as an individual writer than I do. In fact, I think I'm the only one really looking out for my writing interests in a game where businesses are trying to make money.


Hi Robert, I'm sorry to hear you feel that way. Surely, no company can feel the same passion for an author's baby as the author who birthed it, but please don't let that diminish your confidence in our sincere commitment to helping our authors succeed. I see you uploaded all your titles to Smashwords, then removed them two days later, I assume to enroll them in KDP Select? I hope after this 3-month period you'll return to give your books a good chance at Smashwords, Apple, B&N, Sony, Kobo and Diesel (and more on the way).


----------



## Mr. Coffee Snob (Jun 27, 2011)

...


----------



## Guest (Dec 19, 2011)

indieview said:


> No. That is NOT what he is saying. What he said was - we KNOW how to format for meatgrinder - it isn't a big deal. What he thinks is that the vast majority of the world read in two formats epub or mobi. Because KDP accepts an epub file (formatted correctly, duh), Smashwords can get rid of all teh other options and therefore the meatgrinder and just go with a properly formatted epub.


When I uploaded the first issue of _Indie Firsts!_ to Smashwords, I didn't create a PDF format. Why? Because while I still get some sales for fiction in that format, most of the sales do come in epub and mobi formats. So I figured I didn't need the PDF format.

Do you know what happened when I announced the first issue? I got a half dozen emails and such asking me where the PDF version was. Because even though the number of customers who still read in PDF is small, that small minority is LOYAL and they want to buy...but they want to buy in PDF format. So is it your belief I should just shrug and say "Sorry, I realize you have been a loyal customer for years, but you aren't important enough for me to make a PDF version available?"


----------



## Sam Rivers (May 22, 2011)

> My belief is that Smashwords cares less about whether or not I succeed as an individual writer than I do. In fact, I think I'm the only one really looking out for my writing interests in a game where businesses are trying to make money.
> 
> Hi Robert, I'm sorry to hear you feel that way. Surely, no company can feel the same passion for an author's baby as the author who birthed it, but please don't let that diminish your confidence in our sincere commitment to helping our authors succeed. I see you uploaded all your titles to Smashwords, then removed them two days later, I assume to enroll them in KDP Select? I hope after this 3-month period you'll return to give your books a good chance at Smashwords, Apple, B&N, Sony, Kobo and Diesel (and more on the way).


I think if Smashwords really cared about authors, they would make it easier to publish with their site. It should be as easy to publish as Amazon and Barnes & Noble, but it is not since it is time consuming and slow. I pulled the one book I had there and put it on Select where it can get some mileage. I think that Smashwords needs to change their system to make it more like its competitors if it is going to survive. I am not sure though that they care enough about authors to do that.


----------



## Mr. Coffee Snob (Jun 27, 2011)

Franklin Eddy said:


> I think if Smashwords really cared about authors, they would make it easier to publish with their site. It should be as easy to publish as Amazon and Barnes & Noble, but it is not since it is time consuming and slow. I pulled the one book I had there and put it on Select where it can get some mileage. I think that Smashwords needs to change their system to make it more like its competitors if it is going to survive. I am not sure though that they care enough about authors to do that.


In fairness to SW, I had no problem publishing my short stories to Smashwords. I had a couple of incompatability notices, adjusted my files, and everything was fine. Am I missing something?


----------



## daveconifer (Oct 20, 2009)

Franklin Eddy said:


> I think if Smashwords really cared about authors, they would make it easier to publish with their site. It should be as easy to publish as Amazon and Barnes & Noble, but it is not since it is time consuming and slow. I pulled the one book I had there and put it on Select where it can get some mileage. I think that Smashwords needs to change their system to make it more like its competitors if it is going to survive. I am not sure though that they care enough about authors to do that.


I doubt there are many writers on this board who would throw the phrase "doesn't care about authors" around so casually when talking about Mark Coker. He's a good dude who cares enough to have had personal e-mail exchanges with many of us when he didn't have to.


----------



## amiblackwelder (Mar 19, 2010)

Attebery said:


> In my opinion, in the last 4 years Amazon has opened more doors for new authors than any bookstore, agency, major press, or publishing outlet out there. No one else has lifted a finger in the 12 years I've been actively pursuing a writing career. Profit is clearly Amazon's motive, but I'm happy to go along with them as they attempt to corner the market. They're doing a lot of things right while the rest of the industry (publishers, bookstores, agents, and magazines like The New Yorker) stagnate.


EXACTLY!
I'm loyal to those loyal to me. So far Amazon with CS has done more for indie writers than anyone ever. They are always coming up with new ways to make it easier for the indie writer as well as the indie reader to find each other....So, I stick with them.

I am actually only going to use the 90 day select program and then put my books elsewhere...not be completely exclusive on amazon...but why not use it for a period of time if it can bring great visibility. I have brought more attention to my books through free sales on kindle then I have anywhere else and over the past year of work.

Kindle/amazon is a fabulous outlet and it is indies best interest to figure out how who can use them as they use indies for profit.


----------



## Lisa J. Yarde (Jul 15, 2010)

Amazon saw a way to give a lot of indie authors what they need AND stick it to the competition - I can't blame them for forward thinking. Now that Select is here and not likely to go away, the burden is one Smashwords, Pubit, etc. to keep the authors they still have from jumping ship. Even though 90% of my sales derive from Amazon, for now, I'm sticking with the other sites to see if any improvements in author visibility / promotion will happen.  By this time next year, if Select still looks as attractive, I might be headed in the other direction.


----------



## Guest (Dec 19, 2011)

daveconifer said:


> I doubt there are many writers on this board who would throw the phrase "doesn't care about authors" around so casually when talking about Mark Coker. He's a good dude who cares enough to have had personal e-mail exchanges with many of us when he didn't have to.


*Nods in agreement.*

Mark has had to deal with the logistics of appeasing the technical requirements of BN, Apple, Sony, and a bunch of other vendors. While not perfect, the meatgrinder is currently the only real logical means of making sure a document conforms to all of those different requirements.

And lets all keep in mind the one point that is so often forgotten. The KB author-publishers are above the curve compared to the average self-publisher. Those of us who venture into other sites besides KB have witnessed firsthand the horrors that is the bulk of what is going on out there    While I have every confidence in most KB authors being able to format properly for epub, I don't have the same confidence for the vast majority of people flooding the self-pub marketplace right now.

Personally, I think the meatgrinder is a wonderful learning tool that forces new authors to actually pay attention to formatting. Would I like to see some grandfathering for those who have demonstrated the ability to do it themselves and upload directly? Sure. But honestly there have been times when the meatgrinder caught something I didn't (like a stray text box I thought I deleted but didn't) and that last check has been a godsend.


----------



## Guest (Dec 19, 2011)

amiblackwelder said:


> I'm loyal to those loyal to me. So far Amazon with CS has done more for indie writers than anyone ever.


As much as it pains me to say this, no. I think the honor for actually doing more for indies than anyone would go to Lulu.com, which was the first POD service to actually provide affordable publishing options to self-publishers and make it possible to get books into bookstores without inventory. Lulu was one of the driving forces behind self-publishing long before Amazon would give anyone here the time of day. They were one of the first to offer "free" publishing that didn't require thousands of dollars up front. CS was a direct response to companies like Lulu.com, because Amazon finally realized there was money in it (because they were seeing the sales generated by Lulu titles). I know, because I was an early adopter of CS and spent a lot of time talking with CS reps when it first launched. Where lulu failed was that it started to nickle-and-dime its authors and inflate its costs (that, and Bob Young has dubbed himself emperor and deletes threads even remotely critical of Lulu...but I digress...). But in its early days, Lulu was on the front line working for self-publishers and breaking down a lot of doors. Just getting Bowkers to allow individual ISBNs to be sold was a huge deal, and that was something driven by companies like Lulu, not Amazon.


----------



## Sam Rivers (May 22, 2011)

> I truly feel for everyone that depends on sales for a living, but my approach is very different. Given that this is not my full-time source of income (rather a really passionate hobby that I would consider making a profession if it could match my current salary), I just ignore iBooks, Sony and Kobo because of the strict requirements. Amazon and BN (with a paperback) is more than enough to keep me happy.
> 
> Am I losing sales? Probably. But at least I can spend more time on writing and less on formatting.


I agree with you completely.


----------



## Randirogue (Apr 25, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"I obviously understand that they want to take as large a share of the market as they can with their own devices. What company wouldn't? But is that really the only thing stopping them from offering other versions/formats?"_
> 
> That seems like a pretty good reason.


It most definitely is, but couldn't they securing additional profits from customers who shop amazon but use a different device by offering ePub and PDF versions as well?

While it may be enabling the existence of the devices, it's still taking significant profits from their competition, especially since I think that more profits are gained from the ebook sales than from the sales of the devices.

Am I incorrect in this assessment?

Are there legal reasons amazon couldn't sell the other file formats?

If so, how does Smashwords get around selling multiple formats in one location?


----------

