# US Justice Department Files Lawsuit Against Apple over E-Book Pricing



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Just breaking:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-11/u-s-files-antitrust-lawsuit-against-apple-hachette.html

(though clearly this issue has been discussed for awhile now on these boards.)

Betsy


----------



## BoomerSoonerOKU (Nov 22, 2009)

This is concerning price collusion with their agency model.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/us-files-related-antitrust-suit-against-apple-hachette/2012/04/11/gIQAZsnPAT_story.html


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

I'm very glad to see this!!  I wonder how Apple defines price fixing...  

I also find it fascinating that while Apple claims that the agency model has increased competition - it can not be denied that e-book prices rose.  Isn't competition supposed to lower prices?

Also, Apple was angry that Amazon dominated the e-book market.  This is coming from the creators of the iTunes Store.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-57412319-501465/doj-files-e-book-price-fixing-suit-against-apple/?tag=stack


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Already a thread over in the Not Quite Kindle section.  

Mike


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

I'd say this thread should be here.  Directly involves Kindle as the articles I read note how agency pricing was done mainly to thwart Amazon's scheme of pricing books at $9.99 or under.

So obviously the outcome of this suit has big implications for everyone with a Kindle or Kindle app!   So I wouldn't bury it in the off topic forum that a lot of members never visit.


----------



## dbeman (Feb 23, 2011)

It will be interesting to see where the chips fall on this one. On one hand we can have stable yet overpriced e-books offered by a variety of retailers; or we can have cheap e-books that will be offered by only Apple and Amazon (as they will eventually grind other e-book retailers into oblivion.) Once there are only two giants left standing, we will see the prices begin to creep up again; but since that is probably about 10 or so years away from coming to pass we have plenty of time to stock up our virtual libraries!

Personally...I have no problem paying for e-books. If an author is willing to go through the trouble of writing a story that I want to read and a publishing company is willing to format it for me...I have no issue paying for that service. But an e-book should never cost more than its printed counterpart; and in fact should cost the same, or slightly less, than the average paperback.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

People should keep in mind that it's not the Agency Model _per se_ that is the focus of the lawsuit. The Agency Model seems to be perfectly legal... it's about the publishers (and Apple) getting together and all agreeing to collectively go that route. If Apple _et al_ lose the suit, the Agency Model could still be in effect unchanged, as I understand it.

I have to admit that I sympathize with the publishers wanting to have more control over the selling prices. Amazon is perfectly capable of selling books for a loss until all the other booksellers (and publishers) have gone out of business. It's what happens when a company grows to that size and has such deep pockets. Look at what retail chains such as Walmart or Barnes and Noble have done to locally owned stores, even without selling at a loss.

Even though I sympathize with the publishers wanting to maintain some control, that doesn't mean I'm happy about what I consider to be inflated prices, especially for older books.

Here's an author's view on the lawsuit:

http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/03/08/the-collusion-case-against-publishers/

Mike


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

DYB said:


> Isn't competition supposed to lower prices?


Not necessarily. You can compete on service, convenience, product selection, etc.

Mike


----------



## cc1013 (Jul 31, 2009)

mooshie78 said:


> I'd say this thread should be here. Directly involves Kindle as the articles I read note how agency pricing was done mainly to thwart Amazon's scheme of pricing books at $9.99 or under.
> 
> So obviously the outcome of this suit has big implications for everyone with a Kindle or Kindle app!  So I wouldn't bury it in the off topic forum that a lot of members never visit.


Agreed


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I debated about the proper place.....My thoughts were that it was more general than just about Kindle books, but I don't feel strongly about it, so I've merged my thread with this one.  Sorry for any confusion.

Betsy


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

jmiked said:


> I have to admit that I sympathize with the publishers wanting to have more control over the selling prices. Amazon is perfectly capable of selling books for a loss until all the other booksellers (and publishers) have gone out of business. It's what happens when a company grows to that size and has such deep pockets. Look at what retail chains such as Walmart or Barnes and Noble have done to locally owned stores, even without selling at a loss.


I just don't see why it needs to be any different than it is for paper books and other physical goods. Stores buy them at a set price per unit from the distributors (publisher's in the case of books), and then can sell them for whatever they want. Publisher gets the same cut either way.

No reason e-books can't work the same way. Publisher gets $x.xx for every e-book sold (they can vary price book to book), store can sell it for whatever price they want. It's not the publishers business if a store wants to take a loss on their titles.

I've just viewed it as a way that publishers are trying to stall the rise of e-books. They know when e-books become the dominate reading method that their role is greatly diminished as more authors will just cut out the middle man and just pay their own editors and then self publish their works through the various e-book outlets. Publishers understandably want to delay that day as long as possible, and keeping e-book prices up is one way to do that.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Rumor has it that 3 of the Big Pubs, Harper, Hachette and ? want to settle. Apple wants to go to court. I suspect everyone is going to get a slap on the wrist, pay a fine, agree to never collude again and then merrily go back to agency pricing one by one. Or set ebook wholesale at 12.99.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/04/a-message-from-john-sargent

McMillan is fighting it in court.


----------



## mikeschr (Dec 7, 2010)

jmiked said:


> ...I have to admit that I sympathize with the publishers wanting to have more control over the selling prices. Amazon is perfectly capable of selling books for a loss until all the other booksellers (and publishers) have gone out of business. It's what happens when a company grows to that size and has such deep pockets. Look at what retail chains such as Walmart or Barnes and Noble have done to locally owned stores, even without selling at a loss...


This is called predatory pricing, and can also be illegal if the company doing it has a big enough share of the market, and is doing it with the purpose of driving others out. It's prosecuted much less often than collusion, though.

It would also be legal for one publisher to say "You must sell our books for x price." It's when they all get together to do it that it can become illegal.


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

3 publishers have agreed to a settlement. The details of the settlement are outlined in this:

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2012/04/doj-terms-settlement-ebook/

From the article:

Terminate its current contracts with Apple within seven days of the court's acceptance of the settlement;

Terminate any other contracts with e-book retailers that restrict the retailer's ability to set final prices for books or contain a "most favored nation" provision prohibiting price competition, as soon as possible;

Renegotiate contracts with Apple and other retailers, with a two-year prohibition on any contract that prevents retailers from discounting retail prices (see below);

Notify the Department of Justice before entering into any joint ventures between it and another publisher related to e-books;

Designate an antitrust compliance officer and provide the DOJ with a copy of its agreements with any e-book retailers quarterly for five years.


----------



## aslagle (May 17, 2010)

In case someone wants to read the actual brief by the government about the case:

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/ebooks04112012.pdf


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

Incidentally, according to DoJ's accusations, publishers and Apple executives met in upscale NYC restaurants to discuss their plans, sent e-mails to each other reiterating their commitment to the change, and - in some cases - insisted that e-mails be "double deleted" (from Inbox and then from Trash.) 

Another article I saw states that Apple is trying to settle the investigation by European Union.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/11/eu-apple-idUSL6E8FB57Q20120411


----------



## wholesalestunna (Aug 5, 2011)

I'm all for cheaper ebook pricing and competition.


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

Excellent!  I always thought it was unfair for a publisher to tell a retailer how to price an e-book.  If Amazon wants to take a loss - it should be their decision to do so..  This is good news.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

Apparently the lawsuit lists when the Publishers met to discuss this, emails that were sent, and entire discussions on how not to leave a trail behind in order to prevent them from being caught. WEEEEEEEE

And several Publishers were threatened if they did not participate. 

(giggles)

I just enjoy watching arrogant people twist in the wind. I have a feeling that there will be some more settlements once it becomes very clear the level of collusion.

And I am sorry, but Apple, Sony, and BN should all be able to compete with Amazon under the wholesale system. They could have offered bundles and sales and discounts and matched Amazon. Apple decided it wanted most favored nation status and ran amok. And what did it get them? Hardly anything. IBooks is barely used and Apple has done little to make a dent in the e-bookstore realm. So all of this so Apple could gain maybe 10% of the market while the regular reader gets screwed.


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

ProfCrash said:


> And I am sorry, but Apple, Sony, and BN should all be able to compete with Amazon under the wholesale system.


This!

In reality it was all about Apple - a company I do generally admire - not being the big kid on the block, as they are with music, apps, phones, and tablets.


----------



## teiresias (May 26, 2009)

The rundown at The Verge is very good . . .

http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/11/2941053/inside-the-dojs-ebook-price-fixing-case-against-apple-an-analysis

. . . and reads like the DoJ has a pretty damning case against both the publishers and Apple. It definitely doesn't paint Apple or Jobs in a very pro-consumer light either (if anyone was still under the illusion that they ever were).


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

It is pretty easy to paint Amazon in an anti-consumer light. I don't mind businesses acting like businesses. They are not humans, they operate with a different set of priorities and I am fine with that. There are very few "good businesses" and very few "bad businesses". There are arrogant businesses who think that they can get away with flouting the law to their benefit who get caught. 

Amazon has been caught with suspicious practices. They are not perfect.

But they do sell my e-books and I am not happy that said e-books went up in price. So I am happy to see that this is going to change sometime, who knows whent he settlement will be accepted by the courts.


----------



## wholesalestunna (Aug 5, 2011)

I wonder how long it will take for there to be a difference in the book markets though... I'm sure even if these companies lose the suit there will be appeals made.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

The three who settled will have to inact the changes as soon as the settlement is accepted by the court. The court could decide to throw out the settlement and that would slow things down. I have no idea if that is possible or how frequently something like that happens. I would guess that the lawyers for the DOJ and the Publishers are sufficiently proficient at their jobs that the settlement will be approved. I don't know what the timeline would be for that to occur but I am guessing sooner rather then later. 

I would also guess that there will be pressure from market forces that might cause a change in the pricing for the two that did not settle. If Amazon, BN, and other stores are able to start discounting and bundeling and smaller independent bookstores are able to get back into the business of selling mainstream books, there could be a demand from readers that the other two allow the same for their books. Otherwise, readers might decide that it is better to buy books from those who settled and not the ones fighting the case. I would image that the price difference might be enough to disuade people from buying their books.

There could be negative effects as well. Windowing might grow, where the three who settled decide to hold back e-books for a period time to encourage the sale of hardback books. 

As others have pointed out, this does not mean the end of the Agency Model, only relaxing the restrictions imposed by the Agency Model. It could be that those who settle continue to insist that they set the price and Amazon and other companies have to decide how much they are willing to lose in profits by discounting and the like.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

I read this on the New York Times front page and I am intrigued. I will be curious to see how this shakes out.  Will it allow Amazon to regain ebook dominance? Will it make it easier or harder for us indie publishers compete?  Right now, by setting a lower price than the bigger publishers, I can be a cheaper alternative to the big names.  If Amazon can make a well know author's book 99 cents, what then?


----------



## Eltanin Publishing (Mar 24, 2011)

jmiked said:


> People should keep in mind that it's not the Agency Model _per se_ that is the focus of the lawsuit. The Agency Model seems to be perfectly legal... it's about the publishers (and Apple) getting together and all agreeing to collectively go that route. If Apple _et al_ lose the suit, the Agency Model could still be in effect unchanged, as I understand it.


True, there can still be agency model contracts, but the publishers can not prohibit the retailer from discounting the books. If an agency contract says that the retailer gets x% of a sale, but the retailer can discount the book, then if the retailer still gets x% of the sale, the publisher would get less money than if the book wasn't discounted. The alternative is what Amazon did prior to the agency model - the publisher charges a wholesale price, and gets it, and if Amazon wants to sell a book at zero profit or even at a loss, they can. Or, the publisher could say that it's an agency model, but if the retailer discounts the selling price, the difference comes out of the retailer's percentage (so the publisher gets the same amount of money no matter what), but then that's essentially the same as non-agency contracts.

In any case, it means Amazon will be permitted to reduce the sale price of books, for special offers, buy-3-get-one-free, whatever they want to do. Maybe Prime members will get a percentage off of ebooks! That would be cool. I don't really care (as a reader) what kind of contract it is behind the scenes, as long as Amazon is allowed to toy with the price - which means cheaper ebooks for us.

Also, if Amazon becomes the seller again instead of the publisher being the seller, we won't have to pay sales tax if there's no Amazon hub in our state.


----------



## Eltanin Publishing (Mar 24, 2011)

ProfCrash said:


> It is pretty easy to paint Amazon in an anti-consumer light. I don't mind businesses acting like businesses. They are not humans, they operate with a different set of priorities and I am fine with that. There are very few "good businesses" and very few "bad businesses". There are arrogant businesses who think that they can get away with flouting the law to their benefit who get caught.
> 
> Amazon has been caught with suspicious practices. They are not perfect.
> 
> But they do sell my e-books and I am not happy that said e-books went up in price. So I am happy to see that this is going to change sometime, who knows whent he settlement will be accepted by the courts.


You think this suit paints _Amazon _as anti-consumer? Did you mistype and mean Apple? Apple is the one that conspired to fix prices and force customers to pay more. Amazon wanted the freedom to sell ebooks cheaper to the public - at a loss if they want (as many grocery stores do on sale items, to get people into the store), or offer special discounts (buy 3 get 1 free, for instance, or maybe a "club" discount, such as 10% off for Prime members, etc., or simply put books on sale). Now they will be able to.


----------



## teiresias (May 26, 2009)

balaspa said:


> I read this on the New York Times front page and I am intrigued. I will be curious to see how this shakes out. Will it allow Amazon to regain ebook dominance? Will it make it easier or harder for us indie publishers compete? Right now, by setting a lower price than the bigger publishers, I can be a cheaper alternative to the big names. If Amazon can make a well know author's book 99 cents, what then?


Ummm, has Amazon lost ebook dominance?


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

No, I don't think this suit does. I think that there have been plenty of other articles that have painted Amaon in a bad light (labor practices, conditions in their warehouses, hiring practices ect...) 

I don't see Apple or the Publishers as being evil, they are businesses. They were/are desperate to deal with a new market that they don't understand and cannot figure out how to make work. They appear to have colluded and made some decisions that are going to cost them. Hopefully. And I am going to enjoy watching it because their decision cost me a good amount of money. (winks)

And no, Amazon has not lost its dominance but it has lost some market share. We don't know how much because Amazon does not release numbers that would allow us to estimate that. We don't know how permentant that market share lose is going to be because BN and Kobo might not be financially strong enough to match whatever Amazon does once new contracts are in place. Heck, we cannot even comment on what those contracts are going to look like right now. There might not be much change.

I doubt we will see a return to pricing pre-Agency Model.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Amazon is perfectly capable of selling books for a loss until all the other booksellers (and publishers) have gone out of business.


Discounting leads to a curious situation with publishers. The publisher gets the price he charges Amazon, then Amazon takes a loss. Suppose the publishers sells to Amazon for $10, and Amazon sells to the consumer for $8.

Consumers will buy more books at $8 than at $10. They will buy more at $10 than they will at $12.

So the publisher makes more money when Amazon discounts and consumers buy more. The discount doesn't affect what the publisher gets for the book. he gets $10 even if Amazon sells for a nickel.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Discounting leads to a curious situation with publishers. The publisher gets the price he charges Amazon, then Amazon takes a loss. Suppose the publishers sells to Amazon for $10, and Amazon sells to the consumer for $8.
> 
> Consumers will buy more books at $8 than at $10. They will buy more at $10 than they will at $12.
> 
> So the publisher makes more money when Amazon discounts and consumers buy more. The discount doesn't affect what the publisher gets for the book. he gets $10 even if Amazon sells for a nickel.


Sooner or later losing money on every sale becomes...unwise, while your opponent (pub) makes ever more profit off of your discounting.


----------



## mom133d (aka Liz) (Nov 25, 2008)

jackz4000 said:


> Sooner or later losing money on every sale becomes...unwise, while your opponent (pub) makes ever more profit off of your discounting.


True. But they, being all businesses that sell products at a loss, are counting on you buying additional items that aren't on sale, and are probably marked up, to make up the difference.


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

mom133d (aka Liz) said:


> Sooner or later losing money on every sale becomes...unwise, while your opponent (pub) makes ever more profit off of your discounting.


Unless the discounted product makes another product more desirable.. as is the Kindle.. The $9.99 was originally part of the desirability of the Kindle.


----------



## HappyGuy (Nov 3, 2008)

Actually this whole thing came about because Steve Jobs knew he was going to pass away and wanted to make a bundle of money for his estate by controlling the price of his book. Well, that's one theory, anyway.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

HappyGuy said:


> Actually this whole thing came about because Steve Jobs knew he was going to pass away and wanted to make a bundle of money for his estate by controlling the price of his book. Well, that's one theory, anyway.


Source?

Mike


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

jmiked said:


> Source?


I think that, as the lawyers say, "That was strictly a fanciful jest!"


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

I was wondering how soon we would start to see price drops... then got an alert on one this morning. Maybe just coincidence though. I keep imagining some kind of mass drop in prices and getting giddy like it's Christmas, lol.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

The settlement actually prevents Amazon from taking a loss on e-books. Their net balance for each Publisher has to be at east 0. This is to prevent one retailer from undercutting all the others because they can. So prices will drop but not back to what they were before 2010 and probably on select titles. I do hope we see more bundling and the like.

By the way, 16 states have filed their own law suits against Apple and the two who did not settle.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

ProfCrash said:


> The settlement actually prevents Amazon from taking a loss on e-books. Their net balance for each Publisher has to be at east 0. This is to prevent one retailer from undercutting all the others because they can. So prices will drop but not back to what they were before 2010 and probably on select titles. I do hope we see more bundling and the like.
> 
> By the way, 16 states have filed their own law suits against Apple and the two who did not settle.


Better than nothing. Especially if it assures publishers aren't going to pull availability of ebooks from Kindle to avoid Amazon selling them at a loss. I wasn't really expecting to see Amazon selling them at a loss again anyway - not when it's basically what has caused all this.

Has anyone read the full quote from Jobs which is apparently from his biography?

http://go.bloomberg.com/tech-blog/2012-04-11-steve-jobs-bio-gives-justice-dept-ammo-for-e-book-lawsuit/



Steve Jobs said:


> "Amazon screwed it up. It paid the wholesale price for some books, but started selling them below cost at $9.99. The publishers hated that - *they thought it would trash their ability to sell hardcover books at $28.* So before Apple even got on the scene, some booksellers were starting to withhold books from Amazon. So we told the publishers, 'We'll go to the agency model, where you set the price, and we get our 30%, and yes, the customer pays a little more, but that's what you want anyway.' But we also asked for a guarantee that if anybody else is selling the books cheaper than we are, then we can sell them at the lower price too. So they went to Amazon and said, 'You're going to sign an agency contract or we're not going to give you the books.'"


This was interesting to me because I remember having a discussion here about the release dates of hardcovers, paperbacks, and ebooks and relations to pricing when some people felt the price of an ebook has no effect on hardcover sales because they are different markets. Clearly, the publishers disagree. Ah, here was the topic: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,108368.0.html


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

ProfCrash said:


> *The settlement actually prevents Amazon from taking a loss on e-books.* Their net balance for each Publisher has to be at east 0. This is to prevent one retailer from undercutting all the others because they can. So prices will drop but not back to what they were before 2010 and probably on select titles. I do hope we see more bundling and the like.


So Amazon can't sell below their cost? Where did you see that professor? If that is true I don't see prices declining to 2009 at all. The Pubs merely make wholesale for new releases 12.99. This is not such a big deal for ebook readers as some may think.

'Course the court hasn't ruled yet and Apple will probably fight this to the Supreme Court, unless the evidence is too negative.


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

And now Australia is considering its own lawsuit against Apple and the book publishers over e-book prices.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/04/12/australian_government_may_also_sue_apple_over_e_book_pricing.html

As far as how far prices will drop, Professor is right, I saw it mentioned that the retailer must show that overall (not on per book basis), but overall they are not selling a given publisher's books at a loss. Which actually means Amazon can still do new releases and bestsellers at $9.99, and then raise prices after some window of time. Which is what stores like B&N have been doing for ever; new hardcovers are discounted.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

This is from the only article I've seen that alludes to a limit on retailers discount limit:

"The settlement allows publishers to negotiate limits on how much retailers can discount, ensuring retailers can't lose money overall on e-book sales. Moreover, Amazon may be cautious about across-the-board discounts because its profit margins are already thin." WSJ


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

I would have to go digging through the topic at Mobil Read to find the article. That topic is a bit longer and I don't have the time to do it so I cannot get the article. Amazon can sell some books at a loss, they just have to sell other books at a high enough price to balance the loss. (shrugs)


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Don't go digging Prof, I found it. Amazon is limited to how much discounting they can do. They can deeply discount only so much.


----------



## Shastastan (Oct 28, 2009)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Discounting leads to a curious situation with publishers. The publisher gets the price he charges Amazon, then Amazon takes a loss. Suppose the publishers sells to Amazon for $10, and Amazon sells to the consumer for $8.
> 
> Consumers will buy more books at $8 than at $10. They will buy more at $10 than they will at $12.
> 
> So the publisher makes more money when Amazon discounts and consumers buy more. The discount doesn't affect what the publisher gets for the book. he gets $10 even if Amazon sells for a nickel.


Exactly. However, Amazon is trying to make sales revenues. That's their goal. If they put the publishers out of business, that would make for less sales. As someone else pointed out, the publishers were hoping that ebooks will just go away. Now they may be just trying to drag out the publishing of dtb's. They are stuck with their sunk cost of their physical publishing facilities. Those facilities are not as marketable now. I have to wonder how much foresight the publishers have. It seems counterproductive to me that they would want to limit their sales by forcing the prices up rather than decrease prices to increase sales. Personally, I used to buy those $3.99 hardbacks by famous authors at BN rather than buy that same book a year earlier at $27.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Keep in mind that one of the reasons Amazon did such deep discounts at the beginning was to get the buzz going about Kindle.  And it worked. 

I'm not too concerned about the ultimate outcome anyway.  I buy books I want if the price is right.  For one book that might be $1 for a different one it might be $15.  Depends on the book.


----------



## Shastastan (Oct 28, 2009)

And our wants and needs change over time.  I was a member of the "No Book Over $9.99" club when that movement started.  I made an honest effort to just look for free and cheap books, too.  That gave about a 50-50 result for me.  I would start some books and waste time reading only to stop about half way through the book.  I also discovered some authors that I really like and bought more of their books at normal prices.  Now, I just buy whatever novel I want to read at the time.  I've stopped trying to find bargain books since I have other things going on right now.  Maybe in the future..... ymmv.


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

I originally took that pledge as well.  For the most part - I have bought older books in a series - which are around $7.99 - but I occasionally want  the latest book by a favorite author.  Sometimes I buy it - but usually I don't.  Just is hard to dive in when they used to be $9.99.


----------



## mikeschr (Dec 7, 2010)

Eltanin Publishing said:


> Also, if Amazon becomes the seller again instead of the publisher being the seller, we won't have to pay sales tax if there's no Amazon hub in our state.


Well, in most places, you still owe the tax. The only question is whether Amazon is forced to collect it.


----------



## wholesalestunna (Aug 5, 2011)

Shastastan said:


> And our wants and needs change over time. I was a member of the "No Book Over $9.99" club when that movement started. I made an honest effort to just look for free and cheap books, too. That gave about a 50-50 result for me. I would start some books and waste time reading only to stop about half way through the book. I also discovered some authors that I really like and bought more of their books at normal prices. Now, I just buy whatever novel I want to read at the time. I've stopped trying to find bargain books since I have other things going on right now. Maybe in the future..... ymmv.


See I have been like this, but then I read a lot of books that were "just okay". Then I'd decide to treat myself to a book by Lee Child, Vince Flynn, or Stephen King and get spoiled. Most of the free or cheap books I've started reading lately I can't get past the first couple chapters.

I'm trying nit to get my hopes up when it comes to a price drop because I think this is far from over, but it would be nice.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

I doubt that there will be a return to the $9.99 days precisely because the Kindle is successful, Amazon does not want to lose money on selling things if they can avoid it,  and most people are used to paying more for books. I am sure there will be some great promotions. I am hoping for bundles that are attractively priced. That type of thing.

I never took the $9.99 pledge. I wanted to read what I wanted to read and if it was more expensive then such is life. I will not be sad to see books drop more to the $12 range from $14 or $15. I think that is more realistic.


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

I mostly stuck to the $9.99 pledge.  Only bought at most 5 books over that price since getting a Kindle.  There are about 400 unread books in my library, so there's really not much I'm desperate enough to have that won't be cheaper eventually.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

A Dance with Dragons is the only e-book I've paid over $9.99 for.  I don't mind waiting for prices to drop.  Most things I read are in the $5-10 range.


----------



## Shastastan (Oct 28, 2009)

wholesalestunna said:


> See I have been like this, but then I read a lot of books that were "just okay". Then I'd decide to treat myself to a book by Lee Child, Vince Flynn, or Stephen King and get spoiled. Most of the free or cheap books I've started reading lately I can't get past the first couple chapters.
> 
> I'm trying nit to get my hopes up when it comes to a price drop because I think this is far from over, but it would be nice.


Pledge or no pledge, I buy every Vince Flynn book as soon as it's announced. If he wrote more, I would buy more.

I would like to see them package a series, by authors, and then offer the series at a discount.


----------



## wholesalestunna (Aug 5, 2011)

Yeah I know some of the Harry Bosh (by Michael Connelly) series is like that. You get three books for like 20 dollars. Sure beats 9.99 a book!


----------



## Steph H (Oct 28, 2008)

Y'know....the one publisher I haven't seen mentioned anywhere -- and I admit I haven't read the official Complaint nor every story out there, but still -- is the 6th Big Publisher, Random House.  Granted, they held out for a long time before they started doing the Agency Model.  But they DID finally give in and start doing it.  So I says to myself, how come they aren't being investigated/settled/sued too?  Or maybe I'm just missing it....

All the stories say "5 of the 6" without saying anything about the 6th.  Seems odd.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

Steph H said:


> Y'know....the one publisher I haven't seen mentioned anywhere -- and I admit I haven't read the official Complaint nor every story out there, but still -- is the 6th Big Publisher, Random House. Granted, they held out for a long time before they started doing the Agency Model. But they DID finally give in and start doing it. So I says to myself, how come they aren't being investigated/settled/sued too? Or maybe I'm just missing it....
> 
> All the stories say "5 of the 6" without saying anything about the 6th. Seems odd.


One of the articles I read mentioned it. As another member has pointed out, it is not the agency model itself which is illegal, it's the fact that these 5 publishers and Apple conspired to raise prices. Random House was apparently not a part of that conspiracy and therefore they are not being sued.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

Yup, the year delay in implementation saved Random House.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

ProfCrash said:


> Yup, the year delay in implementation saved Random House.


Although if it comes to a point where there books are more expensive than anyone else's, they may change back to a wholesale model as well. Seems that the agency model would be a lot more work on the part of the company for less money - so I can't imagine that it's all that desirable from a long term corporate financial perspective.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Geoffrey said:


> so I can't imagine that it's all that desirable from a long term corporate financial perspective.


'Long term' being beyond the current quarterly shareholders report.  

Mike


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

Exactly.


----------



## Steph H (Oct 28, 2008)

Ah, that makes sense what y'all said about Random House.  Thanks.  I hope they'll essentially abide by the same results, though, especially since they DID hold out for so long and were pretty much against it as I recall (and thus, the holdout).


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

Shastastan said:


> Pledge or no pledge, I buy every Vince Flynn book as soon as it's announced. If he wrote more, I would buy more.


Me too!! I sure hope he gets past his health issues..


----------



## Zorrosuncle (Nov 11, 2008)

Greetings -- Discounting is a valid vendor tool.  How would you like it if every store charged the same price on everything.  Discounting is in effect a price leader.  In the case of Amazon, it brings customers to the Kindle book portion of their website.  In my case, I have bought an author for $.99 and finding I like that author, I buy others of his books at the higher price.  Also, I have found myself looking around at other books, and in many cases, I have left the Kindle book section to browse other Amazon pages.  It's just plain good business -- good for us, good for Amazon, and good for the publishers -- and good for the economy.

What is bad here is the greed of the publishers and Apple who received a 30% slice of a higher price at Amazon customer's expense.  The court should award Amazon damages who should pass it on to us customers.  But then again, it wasn't Amazon doing the suing.

ZU


----------



## Xopher (May 14, 2009)

That's something I have wondered about. The suit states customers ended up paying more based on the Agency model. Who gets the settlement amount? I doubt it will go back to the customers.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

I fully expect that the customers will see some of it. I am not sure how but I can see Amazon, for example, sending gift certificates based on how many books you had bought between when Agency Pricing went into effect and today.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

http://dearauthor.com/features/industry-news/explanation-of-the-settlement-between-doj-hachette-harper-collins-and-simon-schuster-and-what-happens-next/

Interesting read.


----------



## ElaineOK (Jun 5, 2009)

An earlier poster made the comment about the agency pricing policy not being illegal, the collusion is illegal.  I'm not sure that this implementation of agency pricing is legal.  The idea is based on a US Supreme Court case interpreting the antitrust laws.  It addressed a specific set of facts and decided that those facts were ok.  The agency pricing model is based on that, but it is different; and that opinion did not create a safe harbor.  

I haven't read the complaint yet, but from what I have heard the Justice Dept. is not arguing the legality of the agency pricing model.  However, there an argument can be made that this implementation is an improper restraint of trade.

Elaine 
Norman, OK


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

ProfCrash said:


> I fully expect that the customers will see some of it.


I don't. If a fine is levied, it will go to the government, who has filed the lawsuit. Nobody else will likely get anything.

Mike


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

jmiked said:


> I don't. If a fine is levied, it will go to the government, who has filed the lawsuit. Nobody else will likely get anything.
> 
> Mike


Plus 50% or so to the lawyers


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Chad Winters said:


> Plus 50% or so to the lawyers


Well, if it's the government, the lawyers already work for them, right? I wouldn't expect them to get a cut of the money.

Mike


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

jmiked said:


> Well, if it's the government, the lawyers already work for them, right? I wouldn't expect them to get a cut of the money.
> 
> Mike


You have a point, I was thinking of civil class-action lawsuits where the plaintiffs get two dollars each and the lawyers get millions


----------



## Sandpiper (Oct 28, 2008)

I'm not a voracious reader, so don't buy a lot of Kindle books.  Pretty much buy what I want when I want it.  This morning there's a book I'd like -- 

Amazon's hardcover bargain price - $9.31

Kindle edition - $17.99

          

Not getting it now.


----------



## SandyLu562 (May 8, 2010)

I'm really hoping the end results of all the lawsuits over agency pricing includes pricing of select e-books at the 4 for 3 pricing of select paperbacks that Amazon uses! I've been personally boycotting any e-books over that price (I too can wait a year or so for prices on recently published books to drop) and have been using Overdrive on public lending library websites. 

I wonder if any of these lawsuits will have an effect on whether the Kindle e-books borrowed from libraries can be downloaded via wireless again! To me, that new policy from publishers is aimed strictly at Amazon. All e-Pub books can be downloaded by the Sony Wi-Fi, no computer needed! Well, you do need wi-fi tho LOL.


----------



## cherylktardif (Apr 21, 2010)

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I read the documents and it seems there's enough evidence to support the charges. Sad though. We already have so many changes occurring in this industry. Who knows how this will impact the book biz!


----------



## Routhwick (Apr 1, 2012)

Holy ripple effects, Batman! Now Canada and (soon) Australia are getting in on the act.


----------



## wholesalestunna (Aug 5, 2011)

If the prices are going to drop I hope it happens before this summer... I'm gonna have a lot of time to read!


----------



## VondaZ (Apr 21, 2009)

Supposedly, it won't happen before June when the 60-day comment period ends: http://www.teleread.com/ebooks/what-to-expect-when-youre-expecting-a-publisherdoj-settlement/. At that point, they have to terminate existing contracts and make new ones. Then we might start seeing some effects of the settlement.


----------



## MamaProfCrash (Dec 16, 2008)

A judge has to approve the settlement which means wighing the comments. We know that the Authors Guild is going to comment and try and get the settlement nullified.


----------

