# Google Play Issues



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

The first thing I do when I wake up is grab my laptop and check my emails while my husband makes coffee. Then, I check social media, then I check out my book rankings. This morning, I nearly spit my coffee out on my laptop when I saw that my $3.99 bundle, my highest income product, was on the bestsellers list..._in the free store_.

I just sort of locked up for a moment, and then refreshed the page several times, but those stubborn zeros wouldn't go away. Went to my KDP dashboard. Sure enough, while I was sleeping I gave away hundreds of free copies.

The first thing I did was contact KDP Support, then I checked out my book on the major sales channels to make sure that it was still regularly priced. Then, I took a shower so that I could calm down and remind myself that it wasn't the end of the world. Major props to KDP, by the time I was out of the shower, they had messaged me back, informing me that Google Play, the one sales channel I'd forgotten to check, had reduced my bundle to free.

I'm a very reasonable person. I'm still trying to figure out what I want to do with all the money I'm earning, so I'm not going to throw a fit over a simple mistake. Yes, about a thousand people got a free copy of my book and my algorithms have probably been [expletive]ed up, but whatever, it's not gonna put me back in the poorhouse. What was important to me was that I figure out why this happened so that I could avoid it in the future.

I'm not going to slander Google Play. Instead, I'll post the exact conversation I had with a representative, and you can decide whether you want to continue listing with them.
*
[Sent them a message explaining the issue and asking why it happened and that I deactivated the title in question]*

Julian G
11:42 AM
Hi Viola, thanks for contacting Google Books Partner Program support! Can you please wait one moment while I review your information?

me
11:42 AM
Certainly

Julian G
11:44 AM
Thanks for your query, Viola.
I understand that the discounting on the Play Store may be affecting your business with other retailers, but as per the Terms of Service and the Addendum to which you agreed at the time of signing up, we cannot undo the discounts or promise that they won't be used in future.

me
11:46 AM
I don't recall reading that you could make my book free without my consent.
If I misread, then that's a very bizarre clause.
I'm not asking for compensation, I'm trying to understand why this happened.

Julian G
11:46 AM
If you don't mind I could tell which clause in your Addendum talks about the discounting policy.
waiting a moment**

me
11:47 AM
I don't care about the clause. I want to know, if I am publishing through your sales channel in the future, how can I prevent my books from being made free?

Julian G
11:48 AM
Unfortunately, there is no option as of now by which you can avoid the discounts on your books.
I'm sorry about that.

me
11:48 AM
Okay, that is all I need to know. Thank you for your time.

Julian G
11:49 AM
You've also mentioned that you'd like your books to be deactivated. Do you want me to process that for you?

[I didn't actually mention this, but was more than happy to accept his generous offer]

me
11:49 AM
Yes please. Thank you.

 Julian G
11:50 AM
Sure, Viola. I will send you a confirmation email when that is done. Please let me know if I can help you with anything else?

me
11:50 AM
No, that will be all.

Julian G
11:51 AM
Okay. Good Day!

Google Support
11:51 AM
Thank you for contacting Google Books Partner Program chat support. Your chat session is now complete.

So, there's that. I don't think that most of the people who downloaded my book for free would have bought it at full price, but my bundle does earn around $400/day on Zon, which I'm out for today and I'll have to crawl back up from the algorithm abyss. Hopefully from all of this I've gained some new readers, but one thing's for sure, unless Google Play changes its policy, I won't be working with them again.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Viola,
It may be worse than you think.  You were featured at ereaderiq this morning in the freebies.  I thought you were running a promotion.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Sorry to hear it, Viola.  Hoping it doesn't have any long term impacts on your sales.

This isn't the first thread like this here.  I'm thinking Google saw an influx of uploaders after TK's awesome thread.  The problem being that they could see just as quick of an exodus if they keep playing games like this.  I doubt I'm the only one here who'll be keeping a close eye on them for the foreseeable future.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

I've been debating if I even want to screw with Googeplay anymore. 

This month I've earned close over $3100 at Amazon, close to $500 at D2D, $50 at ARE and like $15 at GP. 

My books won't sell there at all. But it's a powerful tool in helping me get permafree.


----------



## 31842 (Jan 11, 2011)

What a nightmare!  That is not cool.  Not cool at all.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Did you make anything on Google during the discounting? You'll get the full royalty on the bundle, there, even though Google was giving it away.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

cinisajoy said:


> Viola,
> It may be worse than you think. You were featured at ereaderiq this morning in the freebies. I thought you were running a promotion.


Yeah, I've spent all morning doing damage control. I unpublished the title right away. A few large Facebook groups picked it up as well, and I had to go awkwardly explain why the freebie was no longer available. Right now I'm in the process of republishing it and can only hope that it'll be $3.99 now that GP has deactivated the title.



Becca Mills said:


> Did you make anything on Google during the discounting? You'll get the full royalty on the bundle, there, even though Google was giving it away.


Possibly. Haven't checked yet. That's good to know though.



Rick Gualtieri said:


> Sorry to hear it, Viola. Hoping it doesn't have any long term impacts on your sales.
> 
> This isn't the first thread like this here. I'm thinking Google saw an influx of uploaders after TK's awesome thread. The problem being that they could see just as quick of an exodus if they keep playing games like this. I doubt I'm the only one here who'll be keeping a close eye on them for the foreseeable future.


Yeah, I feel bad that I've been overlooking those threads now. This has been such a headache.


----------



## Lummox JR (Jul 1, 2012)

We had a pretty recent thread along these lines. The fallout:

*Pro-Amazon camp:* Most of our money comes from Amazon, so whether or not we like their aggressive price-matching and the fact that our royalties are tied to the sale price, we can't afford for any of our distributors to make discount decisions without our consent and _especially_ without warning.

*Anti-Amazon camp:* It's awful that Amazon matches prices without keeping your royalties up even though it makes no sense for them to do so except as a planned loss leader. They're basically forcing authors into all-or-nothing propositions because their price-matching method is unfair.

*Neutral:* Amazon isn't any more right or wrong in their discounting methods than Google is. An author has to pick what's best for them based on their top sales channels and decide after weighing the pros and cons if they want to deal with Amazon, Google, or both.

Google's loss leader discounts are a way of grabbing market share away from Amazon, but I think they're being myopic to the point of stupidity about how this hurts authors who make most of their money on Amazon. Amazon paying as a percent of gross and aggressively price-matching is _different_, but I don't see it as evil and frankly I don't see how their high royalty payments would be compatible with Google's model over the long haul. I don't think anyone's really a bad actor in this situation, but I do think it's dumb of Google to force authors into an Amazon vs. Google showdown because right now, they're mostly going to side with Amazon.

Furthermore Google is being stupid by not warning authors in advance about the planned discount, giving them time to decide what to do about that and how it will affect their sales channels. Even accepting that Google has the right to discount as they see fit, knowing that we are tied more directly to the revenue stream than a wholesaler and that we almost certainly have multiple irons in the fire means that their decisions do not happen in a vacuum. Authors deserve at least the courtesy of advance notice, even if they can't opt out of the promotions.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 20, 2014)

People keep asking when we are going to add Google Play as a sales channel and this policy is exactly why we don't.


----------



## Lady Vine (Nov 11, 2012)

Oh dear!

You know what's interesting? They seem to only be doing this on titles that are selling like hotcakes on Amazon. It almost seems like they're deliberately trying to sabotage the authors.

*sigh. This is not the way to become a serious Amazon competitor. It _is_, however, the way to lose half of your catalogue. I really hope someone at Google reads these threads and changes this absurd clause.


----------



## B&amp;H (Apr 6, 2014)

What is the maximum price you can put on GP?

Id have pulled it from amazon then set it to 100 USD and promoted the hell out of it, if they were paying you 50 USD a copy they might not be so keen on 10,000 free downloads....


----------



## B&amp;H (Apr 6, 2014)

Lady Vine said:


> Oh dear!
> 
> You know what's interesting? They seem to only be doing this on titles that are selling like hotcakes on Amazon. It almost seems like they're deliberately trying to sabotage the authors.
> 
> *sigh. This is not the way to become an serious Amazon competitor. It _is_, however, the way to lose half of your catalogue. I really hope someone at Google reads these threads and changes this absurd clause.


More likely they are trying to pull traffic from amazon, their bots probably comb the big bs lists, find hotsellers and discount them to try and get people onto play. Given how intransigent googles thinking is amongst the tech heads who run the place they didnt think or care about the authors. Its all ones and zeros to the nerdhouse chocolate factory.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

I'm not understanding why anyone, moving forward, would do business with such an awful business partner until they change those clauses.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

Thanks for surmising it, Lummox, very good points. It boggles my mind that these two entities are ignorant of each other's policies, but if I have to side with one, it'll be the one that pays my bills, not the one that buys me dinner.



Dan Wood said:


> People keep asking when we are going to add Google Play as a sales channel and this policy is exactly why we don't.


Totally makes sense now!



Josef Black said:


> What is the maximum price you can put on GP?
> 
> Id have pulled it from amazon then set it to 100 USD and promoted the hell out of it, if they were paying you 50 USD a copy they might not be so keen on 10,000 free downloads....


LOL! I suppose I'm not as crafty as you are.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Viola if you let me know a way I will gladly send you the money for your book.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

cinisajoy said:


> Viola if you let me know a way I will gladly send you the money for your book.


No, no, no. That's okay, but I appreciate the offer.


----------



## bluwulf (Feb 1, 2014)

Holy Crap!  Sorry about this Viola - Good to know for future.  I was planning on using Google Play but forget that now!


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

It's like a Voltron of glorious incompetence between those two! how hard is it to let authors opt into a discount program AND let authors say 'no, this isn't a sale authorized by me, so don't price match, you ninny'.

And yet if you put something up for free on GP on purpose Amazon couldn't care less.

Really, it'd be one thing if GP did anything besides their dumb hyper-discount thing to drive sales and thus was a decent sales channel, but as they continue on, they're pretty damn mediocre on top of being a pain. I'm honestly shocked this thing is a product of the otherwise very savvy Google suite of online services (except Chrome).


----------



## Robert Dahlen (Apr 27, 2014)

My gosh, that's awful, Viola. I hope you can recoup those lost sales somehow. Does any other site do this, or this is just Google Play?

And needless to say, I won't be using them either. Or buying or downloading anything from them.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

*HOW* do I take my books off sale at Google Play?

The site is more cryptic than iProducer!


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Robert Dahlen said:


> Does any other site do this, or this is just Google Play?


A few years ago, many sites used to do this. Mark Coker, the founder of Smashwords, negotiated with them until they agreed to stop. He used to be considered a bit of a hero around here, for that.


----------



## Lady Vine (Nov 11, 2012)

Vaalingrade said:


> It's like a Voltron of glorious incompetence between those two! how hard is it to let authors opt into a discount program AND let authors say 'no, this isn't a sale authorized by me, so don't price match, you ninny'.
> 
> And yet if you put something up for free on GP on purpose Amazon couldn't care less.
> 
> Really, it'd be one thing if GP did anything besides their dumb hyper-discount thing to drive sales and thus was a decent sales channel, but as they continue on, they're pretty d*mn mediocre on top of being a pain. I'm honestly shocked this thing is a product of the otherwise very savvy Google suite of online services (except Chrome).


It's a power play. Only, in order to do that successfully, one would need to actually have power. Google doesn't, not yet, so doing something like this is a fail. They're going to lose.


----------



## Lummox JR (Jul 1, 2012)

Viola Rivard said:


> Thanks for surmising it, Lummox, very good points. It boggles my mind that these two entities are ignorant of each other's policies, but if I have to side with one, it'll be the one that pays my bills, not the one that buys me dinner.


Neither is ignorant of the other. Google is doing it deliberately to try to grab Amazon sales, and Amazon's royalty model basically forces them to price match aggressively. The problem is, Google acts like their decision doesn't badly hurt authors who make the lion's share of their sales on Amazon, and they don't commit to the basic courtesy of allowing the author time to prepare (or even better, opt out of the promo). I think ultimately Amazon does look at indie authors as business partners, even though they will always put their own needs first; Google doesn't look at authors that way, and it shows in their choices.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

I only had one title left on Google Play after I listed one with Select, and I'd been thinking of delisting it since it doesn't sell and they might mess about with the price. This thread has decided me.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone (May 6, 2013)

Whoa. I decided not to upload anything to GP after joining and seeing all of the hoops you have to jump through to list your book. Just listing one book seemed like more time than it was worth. I didn't realize they can discount your books whenever the heck they want. I'll be staying away for sure now.

This really, really sucks, Viola. *hugs*


----------



## Victoria J (Jul 5, 2011)

Cherise Kelley said:


> A few years ago, many sites used to do this. Mark Coker, the founder of Smashwords, negotiated with them until they agreed to stop. He used to be considered a bit of a hero around here, for that.


Still is in my opinion. I've held off using GP because of this issue.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

I'm probably not a big enough seller for GP to play this on me, but it is making me think about pulling all but my first title. Maybe I could leave my permafree there but put links to B&N, Apple, SW, and Amazon in the back? Maybe even with a quick note as to why I'm doing it?


----------



## Starstruck (Nov 1, 2013)

Wow, I thought GP could discount, but not set the price to _free_! That's scary. I've had trouble with them before because they discounted one of my $2.99 titles and Amazon price matched, which pushed me out of the 70% royalty rate. I fixed that problem quickly (although GP's support was no help) but this sounds like a nightmare. I don't understand how they can get away with this without some kind of warning to authors. =/


----------



## Mark E. Cooper (May 29, 2011)

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Sorry to hear it, Viola. Hoping it doesn't have any long term impacts on your sales.
> 
> This isn't the first thread like this here. I'm thinking Google saw an influx of uploaders after TK's awesome thread. The problem being that they could see just as quick of an exodus if they keep playing games like this. I doubt I'm the only one here who'll be keeping a close eye on them for the foreseeable future.


It will definitely have a longish term impact. It will have driven the title up the ranks and into higher visibility just as a Bookbub does. I expect your other titles and mailing list will gain from this. A BB costs more than this loss. I wonder how much delisting at Google will cost over a year. I must admit Iprice higher at Google to lessen risk of price matching, but I do check sales pages every morning as well. Amazon try to whisper sync my audio quite a lot too. I have to watch them like a hawk.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> It will have driven the title up the ranks and into higher visibility just as a Bookbub does.


Now that the free ranks are separate, going temporarily free on Amazon ruins your rank on the paid charts.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

Lady Vine said:


> It's a power play. Only, in order to do that successfully, one would need to actually have power. Google doesn't, not yet, so doing something like this is a fail. They're going to lose.


You couldn't be more wrong. Google has all the power and all the money. Neither Amazon or Google is interested in your career they are interested in the data that they get from your purchasers.



> "Now what would you like for dinner Mr Bezos, our special options tonight are 10,000 downloads but that comes without any trimmings or we have 100 downloads fully trimmed with our delicious dollar sauce."
> "The first one you said."
> "And you Mr Schmidt?"
> "I'll have what he's having."
> ...


You can tell I am up to my eye-balls in non-fiction writing and miss my dialogue.


----------



## Robert Dahlen (Apr 27, 2014)

Cherise Kelley said:


> A few years ago, many sites used to do this. Mark Coker, the founder of Smashwords, negotiated with them until they agreed to stop. He used to be considered a bit of a hero around here, for that.


Thanks for that, Cherise.

Needless to say, this thread is yet another reason why I'm thankful for the Writer's Cafe -- being warned away from something that could hurt you in the long run.


----------



## Lady Vine (Nov 11, 2012)

Mercia McMahon said:


> You couldn't be more wrong. Google has all the power and all the money. Neither Amazon or Google is interested in your career they are interested in the data that they get from your purchasers.
> 
> You tell I am up to my eye-balls in non-fiction writing and miss my dialogue.


Not in the ebook market they don't. And I agree, neither one is interested in our careers; but one of them is costing some of us more money than they're making. So you tell me who's going to come out the victor in that war.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Cherise Kelley said:


> Now that the free ranks are separate, going temporarily free on Amazon ruins your rank on the paid charts.


This.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

Hi --

I forwarded the link to this post and another to support at Google Play:

https://support.google.com/books/partner/contact/default

Maybe if we all chime in they'll change the policy? If authors like Viola isn't on GP it will hurt all of us in the end ... small fry like me benefit from having the big names on the same sites I'm listed at.


----------



## Huldra (Nov 7, 2013)

Really sorry that happened to you.  

I wonder if this sort of thing can be avoided without de-listing, by a) making different bundles than what is uploaded to Amazon (1-3 and 4-6, instead of 1-6, for example), or b) simply not uploading bundles/standalone books to Google? Surely, they won't suddenly make number 3 in a series free...? *she said, hopefully*


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2014)

Hi Viola,

Thanks for keeping us informed and being so open about what's happening with you.  Currently, I'm with Select, but I'm a reasonable person and I'm a person who likes money.   Select is fine now, and as I continue with my books, I'll stick with it as long as I'm moving toward my financial goal.  However, if it doesn't work out for me, I'll pull my books from Select and put them on other channels besides Amazon.  Your giving us this Google Play warning helps me with my future plans.


----------



## hardnutt (Nov 19, 2010)

I've been thinking about putting my books up on google; I even tried one and failed. I decided to wait to see if D2D add them to their channels.

But after reading this post, I feel being on google would be way too stress-inducing. Can you go to sleep at night? Or does worrying about what they might be up to right this minute keep you awake?


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

Lady Vine said:


> Not in the ebook market they don't. And I agree, neither one is interested in our careers; but one of them is costing some of us more money than they're making. So you tell me who's going to come out the victor in that war.


What you are forgetting is that Google is one of the richest companies in the world, Amazon is huge to us but tiny in the corporate world. Google do not need to care and I won't finish that sentence for fear of Mr Schmidt's legal team.


----------



## Lionel&#039;s Mom (Aug 22, 2013)

C. Gockel said:


> Hi --
> 
> I forwarded the link to this post and another to support at Google Play:
> 
> ...


I hope it works!

Viola, you took it way better than I would have. Sorry this happened, and hopefully you get back up in the ranks very quickly.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

This has just been exceptionally frustrating because the bundle is essentially my entire paid catalogue with the exception of a single 99 cents title. Until this gets sorted out, that'll be my only source of revenue. It's doubly frustrating that of all the titles they could choose to make free, it has to be that one.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Viola Rivard said:


> This has just been exceptionally frustrating because the bundle is essentially my entire paid catalogue with the exception of a single 99 cents title. Until this gets sorted out, that'll be my only source of revenue. It's doubly frustrating that of all the titles they could choose to make free, it has to be that one.


That has got to be really annoying, but you are pretty prolific, so if you have to look at the bright side, at least you've got yourself a lot of potential new readers for your future stuff.


----------



## abishop (May 22, 2014)

Mercia McMahon said:


> What you are forgetting is that Google is one of the richest companies in the world, Amazon is huge to us but tiny in the corporate world.


Google made $60B of revenue last year. Amazon made $74.5B.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Dan Wood said:


> People keep asking when we are going to add Google Play as a sales channel and this policy is exactly why we don't.


Good decision. What a nightmare!


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

If Nook wasn't such a large source of revenue, I'd just go with Select after this poop. Seriously considering experimenting with serial entries on all channels and bundles in Select.


----------



## ShayneRutherford (Mar 24, 2014)

Viola Rivard said:


> If Nook wasn't such a large source of revenue, I'd just go with Select after this poop. Seriously considering experimenting with serial entries on all channels and bundles in Select.


As I understand it, you can't put a bundle in Select if any of the pieces in the bundle are with another vendor.


----------



## legion (Mar 1, 2013)

I'm so sorry, Viola--what a nightmare!

You are taking this very well, and I guess the bright side (like someone up-thread said) is the large chunk of new readers gained from this mishap!

I check on the two paid titles I have on there every now and then, and they're only there because they are combos not listed elsewhere (I'm hoping since they are so differentiated in title etc., even if GP does something nutty, Amazon won't bother because none of my titles on their site match).



Viola Rivard said:


> If Nook wasn't such a large source of revenue, I'd just go with Select after this poop. Seriously considering experimenting with serial entries on all channels and bundles in Select.


I could be wrong, but bundles can't be in Select if individual titles in it are listed on other channels.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

poisonarrowpubs said:


> I could be wrong, but bundles can't be in Select if individual titles in it are listed on other channels.


You're right about that.


----------



## CristinaRayne (Apr 17, 2014)

Yikes!  Thanks for the warning. I had no idea they were discounting to free. Makes me consider pulling all my books except for the permafree. After hearing this, I'm definitely not uploading any bundles!



Josef Black said:


> Id have pulled it from amazon then set it to 100 USD and promoted the hell out of it, if they were paying you 50 USD a copy they might not be so keen on 10,000 free downloads....


This was my thought exactly. Usually price changes go live fairly quickly on GP, so I wonder if changing the price would have automatically negated the free discount?


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

Drat. That was such a happy thought.


----------



## TheSFReader (Jan 20, 2011)

From what I understand, the TOS of BOTH sides are the same : "If WE discount prices on your books, we'll pay you for the undiscounted price, but if we find it for a lesser price elsewhere, we'll cut the royalties". 
If the situation was reversed (the book at Google play sellig gazillions, and Amazon discounting to zero), the effect would still the same.

Right ?

If so, both TOS are unbalanced, in that the smaller player (Google in this case) can't compete on price, only the bigger one. Do I get it right ?


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Also, once Amazon price matches, you have to contact Amazon to get your book off price match. They do not automatically raise the price back up.

Please tell me how to get my books off of Google Play! Do I have to contact their customer service  I seriously cannot find a way to remove them.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

Cherise Kelley said:


> Also, once Amazon price matches, you have to contact Amazon to get your book off price match. They do not automatically raise the price back up.
> 
> Please tell me how to get my books off of Google Play! Do I have to contact their customer service  I seriously cannot find a way to remove them.


When you click on your book's title in their interface, click on the link that says "Live on Google Play" and there's the option to deactivate.


----------



## Mark E. Cooper (May 29, 2011)

Cherise Kelley said:


> Now that the free ranks are separate, going temporarily free on Amazon ruins your rank on the paid charts.


Doesn't matter. Visibility is king. My permafree sells all my other books, not just the ones in that particular series. What will happen is that the readers will like the books, join the mailing list at the back, and search Amazon for more books by this author. I'm not saying this faux promo hasn't cost money short term. Long term it will be a net gain I think.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

abishop said:


> Google made $60B of revenue last year. Amazon made $74.5B.


So Google made slightly more in revenue last year than their total cash reserves of $58B, meanwhile in Seattle Amazon only pulled in $274m income from that revenue to add to their previous year cash pile of $9B. For the record Apple's cash is $159B and Microsoft $84B.

Google has bigger pockets. Amazon has big pockets. Both of them want our data. Amazon wants it to sell things to you, Google wants to sell your data. Amazon needs us more than Google and if a rival comes up on the outside (like iBookstore allowing non-Apple hardware to download iBooks thus blowing a big whole in Amazon's data stream) then Amazon has a lot less to fall back on.

Apple sell hardware, Google sell advertising, and Amazon sell everything. They are tech giants for whom books are a means to an end. Books means buyers. Buyers mean data (or hardware tie-ins for Apple). That's why Amazon is a Seattle company not a New York one. They are Tech Town not Book Town.


----------



## AgnesWebb (Jan 13, 2013)

Really sorry this happened to you, Viola. (Argh!) Thank you for letting everyone know about it, and I hope that there's some sort of silver lining for you. 
I have a few titles on GP that have made like $5 in two months, and I won't be uploading any more on there. Not worth it.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

See, this doesn't concern me as much as it would others, for a few reasons.

Google Play Books is a company I don't do new releases on, per se. So far, I've just put up older titles. Much older ones.

Therefore, if Google Play Books decides to discount one of those releases, it won't kill me. In fact, it could breathe new life into the books.

Example: I just recently placed MOST LIKELY in Google Play Books. It's a $4.99 title because it's a full-length novel. But, I haven't received a new review on MOST LIKELY since 2012, and if it sells 3-6 copies a year, it's been a good year. (It was released in 2011 and had a nice run considering it was my first release, but hasn't sold much anywhere for a couple years.)

So, if Google Play decides to discount and make it free... and Amazon and others match it... I'm fine with that. The eBook has promos for my other titles, and if suddenly it gets popular again through a Google Play free-sale, I have an audiobook and print version that could benefit from that, as well as a list of other titles that also could benefit.

And GPB is probably going to be a place where I only put up older titles, anyway. Because I usually keep new releases in KDP Select for a while, before spinning them out elsewhere, and GPB is not the first place I put them, but the last.

That said, I love it as a place for older titles; it generates almost as much income for me as every other non-Amazon outlet combined.

Used strategically, it's a good market. I just don't put fresh releases there, or books that are still making money hand over fist elsewhere.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Viola Rivard said:


> When you click on your book's title in their interface, click on the link that says "Live on Google Play" and there's the option to deactivate.


Thank you so much.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> Doesn't matter. Visibility is king. My permafree sells all my other books, not just the ones in that particular series. What will happen is that the readers will like the books, join the mailing list at the back, and search Amazon for more books by this author. I'm not saying this faux promo hasn't cost money short term. Long term it will be a net gain I think.


In Viola's case, this was her omnibus of all her books that her permafree is selling. In her shoes, I do not think you would be saying it didn't matter.


----------



## joyceharmon (May 21, 2012)

It baffles me that Google Play is still doing this, because it's obviously backfiring spectacularly. Every instance of this I've heard of, the author responded by pulling from GP not just the book they'd discounted to free, but all her listings. And then she talks about it, on forums and blog posts and message loops, which I'm sure motivates a few other authors to pull their GP listings, and probably a few dozen who were thinking about listing on GP to change their minds. They're losing writers and losing merchandise.

And just imagine how it looks to the customer! Say the customer gets an IM from a friend or reads a blog post that says, "Hey, Big Best-Seller is FREE on Google Play!" - and so they go over to Google Play and not only can't they get Big Best-Seller for free, they can't get it for any price, because it's not there anymore. I'm sure the average reader has no idea about these GP-Amazon issues and no notion of why this book is not available. How does that make Google Play look? It makes them look shoddy and unreliable.


----------



## Evan J (Feb 3, 2014)

If anyone from Google is reading this thread, I would encourage them to start brainstorming of ways that they could get more indies to list books with them. Maybe offer a higher royalty than Amazon, for example? A Select program of your own?

There must be ways that you guys can begin to look attractive to indies. Discounting to free doesn't seem to be working.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Actually, Joyce, I interpret it differently.

Somehow most of Amazon's other competitors decide not to exercise their identical contractual freedom, because they lose indies when they do.

So usually, only Amazon discounts and everyone blesses them when they do it.

But people curse Google when they do the same thing, to try to drive sales.

To me, Google is simply acting like a real competitor to Amazon, refusing to alter their business plan simply to accommodate Amazon's policies.

The real quandry is that Amazon matches Google's sale at their own option and chooses not to pay clients for their chosen books sold during their chosen price-match.

Now, many of us don't mind any of this when we can use it to our advantage. Anyone who's ever used Google or Smashwords or B&N or whoever to "make a book perma-free on Amazon" is taking advantage of Amazon's glitchiness and refusal to make perma-free an internal pricing option.

But when those same price-matching policies hurt our business, we blame... everyone but Amazon.

The problem is not that Google instituted a sale to create some movement on our books.

But we all tend to be fairly Amazon-centric in our thinking, and fault others for how Amazon reacts to its competitors, rather than faulting Amazon for its policies in such instances.

I'm very pro-Amazon. But I'm also in favor of other ebook distributors, as well. My chosen partners are Amazon, Kobo, Smashwords, and Google Play Books.

Since I've become aware of how Google Play does business, I simply do business with them in the way I calculate will benefit my business, meaning I don't put new releases up on Google Play, only older titles.


----------



## thesmallprint (May 25, 2012)

I suspect, perhaps wrongly, that there is no malice in Google's actions here. They've always had a 'feel free to fail' culture to encourage innovation among staff. Their books line is still in its infancy and hasn't been as well thought out as Amazon's. They'll get it right eventually, which will be good for us as it will dilute Amazon's power.  But, in the meantime, it looks like Google are using us as beta-testers, so I'll be taking my books out until they have a more predictable model.

I might even return to KDP for 90 days, after a year away and see how it affects Amazon sales. My figures elsewhere are so comparatively poor, that the borrows will probably pay for the loss.


----------



## kwest (Mar 16, 2013)

Wow, how awful...this DEFINITELY is making me consider pulling my books, especially in light of the fact that I'm going to be releasing a box set at some point. That's a shame, because my sales have been increasing at Google from month to month.

Thanks for the warning, Viola. I've read about Google doing this to another author here (can't remember their name off the top of my head), but when it's more than one, I think it's up to us to let Google know this is in no way acceptable.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

Cherise Kelley said:


> In Viola's case, this was her omnibus of all her books that her permafree is selling. In her shoes, I do not think you would be saying it didn't matter.


Yeah, there's nothing for this "promo" to sell, except for one, measly 99 cent title. This omnibus contains _five _paid titles. I have two permafrees that do some wonderful things for me, but this is simply damaging. If I had say, another bundle out, or even a $2.99 title, I wouldn't be _as_ upset, but I don't, so this is just grinding my biggest source of income to a halt until it gets resolved. And giving me a few grey hairs, but that's beside the point.



Steeplechasing said:


> I suspect, perhaps wrongly, that there is no malice in Google's actions here. They've always had a 'feel free to fail' culture to encourage innovation among staff. Their books line is still in its infancy and hasn't been as well thought out as Amazon's. They'll get it right eventually, which will be good for us as it will dilute Amazon's power. But, in the meantime, it looks like Google are using us as beta-testers, so I'll be taking my books out until they have a more predictable model.


I feel the same way. I understand why they're doing what they're doing, but until they can make me 20k a month I'm not taking their side. If there comes a time where they can deliver comparable results to Amazon, I will reenroll with them. Until then, I, and many other indies, have little choice but to side with Amazon.


----------



## ricola (Mar 3, 2014)

I would have liked to do bundle-only in select because of the free days, but you can't. 

I'm keeping my individual titles on GP, but I won't put a bundle there now.


----------



## Lummox JR (Jul 1, 2012)

I don't see any malice in what Google is doing either, or anything wrong with them choosing to discount.

I do see a problem in their refusing to give authors advance notice of the discount. That would be good courtesy. It would be even better to allow the author to opt out entirely, but not necessarily as important as just giving them a heads up.


----------



## joyceharmon (May 21, 2012)

CraigInOregon said:


> Actually, Joyce, I interpret it differently.
> 
> Somehow most of Amazon's other competitors decide not to exercise their identical contractual freedom, because they lose indies when they do.
> 
> ...


It's not a matter of accommodating Amazon, it's a matter of accommodating the sellers who can choose to sell their products through your site - or not.

And quite simply, when the policy you're following is causing merchandisers to pull their merchandise from your venue and causing other merchandisers to decide not to let you sell their products - you're doing something wrong!


----------



## Alexandra Lynwood (Dec 4, 2013)

A couple of quick thoughts:

1. Consider making a Google specific edition that differs in some way from the Amazon copy. I doubt there are people physically combing the lists and instituting a discount manually, it sounds more like they crawl lists and do it via their own algos. If they can't find an exact match of the book they're probably not going to discount it. I think someone mentioned splitting bundles differently, but you could also try a different (sub)title or adding the words GPlay edition etc. I'm guessing it would cause the system to bypass a match.

2. Google has done this to a number of people lately. Can't help but wonder if it's leading up to some kind of complaint against Amazon in some way, shape, or form. No clue what law it would fall under, but there's no discernable reason to upset bestselling authors who you benefit from having as a vendor when you're trying to grow a market share. So either they just don't care which seems unlikely from a business viewpoint, or they need evidence of anti-competitive practices?


----------



## Bookslinger (Jan 12, 2014)

That's really messed up. I'm so glad I have no interest in Google Play right now. I hope they change this.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

After republishing it through Amazon, it was still free, so I unpublished it again. I'm going to sit on it for the next twelve hours while Google removes the links to my bundle. Hopefully, when I republish it'll be back to $3.99. Final count is 1,604 downloads. =_=

Hopefully, I at least get some new readers. I'm sure mailing list signups are going to be off the charts today, so at least there's that.



Alexandra Lynwood said:


> A couple of quick thoughts:
> 1. Consider making a Google specific edition that differs in some way from the Amazon copy. I doubt there are people physically combing the lists and instituting a discount manually, it sounds more like they crawl lists and do it via their own algos. If they can't find an exact match of the book they're probably not going to discount it. I think someone mentioned splitting bundles differently, but you could also try a different (sub)title or adding the words GPlay edition etc. I'm guessing it would cause the system to bypass a match.


That's definitely something I'm going to consider. It's a shame that I do have to consider writing a "Google Edition" but I will give it some thought after I get back from Chicago.


----------



## Lady Vine (Nov 11, 2012)

CraigInOregon said:


> Actually, Joyce, I interpret it differently.
> 
> Somehow most of Amazon's other competitors decide not to exercise their identical contractual freedom, because they lose indies when they do.
> 
> ...


The trouble is, when your market share is as small as Google's is, you have to re-evaluate your business model, otherwise you're shooting yourself in the foot. And doing it with titles that are bestsellers on the biggest platform in town? Not a very smart move at all. What they should have done, knowing they didn't have the upper hand here, was forewarn the authors so they could act accordingly. But no, they went right in with this bold move, and it's costing them books and publishers. They're the only ones losing out here.

My Amazon rankings are pretty negligible, and if they'd offered me something like this, I would have taken it, but pulled my titles from Amazon first. If they'd done it this way everyone would have won.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Alexandra Lynwood said:


> 1. Consider making a Google specific edition that differs in some way from the Amazon copy. I doubt there are people physically combing the lists and instituting a discount manually, it sounds more like they crawl lists and do it via their own algos. If they can't find an exact match of the book they're probably not going to discount it. I think someone mentioned splitting bundles differently, but you could also try a different (sub)title or adding the words GPlay edition etc. I'm guessing it would cause the system to bypass a match.


The other author who complained about Google Play making a bundle free recently tried this. It did not work.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

joyceharmon said:


> And quite simply, when the policy you're following is causing merchandisers to pull their merchandise from your venue and causing other merchandisers to decide not to let you sell their products - you're doing something wrong!


Every single site has the same license to discount that Amazon and Google do.

Google just tends to exercise it.

Knowing that, one can approach utilizing Google Play Books with a business plan that works what they do to your advantage.

Pulling all of one's titles is a personal choice. Google doesn't have to customize its business plan to accommodate all of us with our vastly different approaches and whims.

What we, as individual sole-proprietorship businesses must do is understand the tendencies of each outlet we partner with, and utilize them only in the ways that benefit us. 

That's why I only put old titles up with them; if they run a freebie sale, it's only going to help those titles, and my overall sales.

Heck, I opt in to KDP for the chance to go free periodically.

But, knowing they do this, would I put a new release with them that's selling like hotcakes on Amazon? Nope. Not to my advantage. So, I use Google Play Books strategically.

That's how we should all approach all of our vendor relationships.


----------



## Alexandra Lynwood (Dec 4, 2013)

Cherise Kelley said:


> The other author who complained about Google Play making a bundle free recently tried this. It did not work.


Hmmm. Do you have a link? I'm curious to see how different the books were because that would mean both Amazon and GPlay decided that the books were the same thing.

If they're going to make arbitrary decisions about books like that then that really is a problem and makes me wonder about their motives even more.


----------



## Bluebonnet (Dec 15, 2013)

kwest said:


> Wow, how awful...this DEFINITELY is making me consider pulling my books, especially in light of the fact that I'm going to be releasing a box set at some point. That's a shame, because my sales have been increasing at Google from month to month.
> 
> Thanks for the warning, Viola. I've read about Google doing this to another author here (can't remember their name off the top of my head), but when it's more than one, I think it's up to us to let Google know this is in no way acceptable.


This is the other thread:

http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,187263.0.html
"Why I had to delete my book from Google Play Books," thread started by romanceauthor on June 9, 2014. At the moment the thread is down on page 6 of the Writers' Cafe forum. GP made romanceauthor's best earning novel free. He/she contacted GP and asked to have the book taken off free, but got the same response as Viola: too bad, so sad, but that's the GP policy.

Viola, I'm sorry this happened to you too, and thanks for warning the rest of us. I haven't published my book yet, but when I do, I will certainly NOT publish it on Google Play! It's gonna be Amazon for me. Not that I expect my book to make much money, but on the chance that it did, I would not tolerate Google Play destroying my Amazon income because they want to play a game of chicken with Amazon.


----------



## Lummox JR (Jul 1, 2012)

Alexandra Lynwood said:


> Google has done this to a number of people lately. Can't help but wonder if it's leading up to some kind of complaint against Amazon in some way, shape, or form. No clue what law it would fall under, but there's no discernable reason to upset bestselling authors who you benefit from having as a vendor when you're trying to grow a market share. So either they just don't care which seems unlikely from a business viewpoint, or they need evidence of anti-competitive practices?


Considering this is not new behavior for Google I'm not so sure if they're up to anything. But I'm also not sure if there's been an uptick in this kind of thing, or if indies are just noticing more as more authors start using Google Play. My hunch is that it's the latter.


----------



## jamielakenovels (Jan 14, 2014)

Viola Rivard said:


> my bundle does earn around $400/day on Zon, which I'm out for today and I'll have to crawl back up from the algorithm abyss.


Oooh, what's Zon? How do we get on it? What other outlets for erotica or romance are there besides BN, Kobo, Amazon and Google Play would you recommend?


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Alexandra Lynwood said:


> Hmmm. Do you have a link? I'm curious to see how different the books were because that would mean both Amazon and GPlay decided that the books were the same thing.
> 
> If they're going to make arbitrary decisions about books like that then that really is a problem and makes me wonder about their motives even more.


Bluebonnet found it. There's a post in this other thread about how GP discounted a dissimilar bundle:



Bluebonnet said:


> This is the other thread:
> 
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,187263.0.html
> "Why I had to delete my book from Google Play Books," thread started by romanceauthor on June 9, 2014. At the moment the thread is down on page 6 of the Writers' Cafe forum. GP made romanceauthor's best earning novel free. He/she contacted GP and asked to have the book taken off free, but got the same response as Viola: too bad, so sad, but that's the GP policy.


----------



## Nathan Elliott (May 29, 2012)

jamielakenovels said:


> Oooh, what's Zon? How do we get on it? What other outlets for erotica or romance are there besides BN, Kobo, Amazon and Google Play would you recommend?


'Zon is Amazon. Sorry to disappoint.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Isn't the solution for those who'd like to avoid this situation obvious? 

Just don't upload the bundles to Google play. Upload them everywhere else, but not Google play.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> Isn't the solution for those who'd like to avoid this situation obvious?
> 
> Just don't upload the bundles to Google play. Upload them everywhere else, but not Google play.


That, or only upload backlist titles that aren't selling as well as they used to. Strategic partnership. It doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing game.


----------



## Charmaine (Jul 20, 2012)

I'm sorry this happened Viola! Ugh!
A really good idea did spring from this discussion though.
For people who have the potential to earn good money at google (or anyone for that matter), a slightly different version would be a great idea. I wonder what changes would have to be made?
Maybe just title or subtitle tweaking?
As long as it wasn't too much, I would do it if I thought I could earn more than a $100 a month.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

Patty Jansen said:


> Isn't the solution for those who'd like to avoid this situation obvious?
> 
> Just don't upload the bundles to Google play. Upload them everywhere else, but not Google play.


You're right, I'm just pissed right now. I don't stand to lose anything from putting 99 cent titles there. I won't be putting my upcoming 2.99 serial entries or bundles there though. I'm going to research things further. If GP does turn out to become a lucrative sales channel, I may invest in separate covers and slightly different names for a Google Edition. I'll research it further when I'm less angry.


----------



## Quiss (Aug 21, 2012)

Google started off promising this month and then totally fizzled. It's almost a moot point for me.

I do hope that, because I already have one book free with them, they'll leave the others alone. But, like Mark, I'm watching them like a hawk.

At this point sales Apple and B&N are growing most rapidly for me, both via D2D. Where Amazon seems to slow down a bit over the summer, these two are going up nicely. I just wish there were more ways to promote at those outlets.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

Yes, I've noticed Barnes has picked up a great deal. Amazon has plateaued, but I think it's just because I slacked off a bit this month and only did one release. Barnes has earned enough to pay all of my bills (not that I live very extravagantly) but it's my second-most lucrative sales channel, followed closely by iBooks.


----------



## Guest (Jun 27, 2014)

Viola Rivard said:


> Yes, I've noticed Barnes has picked up a great deal. Amazon has plateaued, but I think it's just because I slacked off a bit this month and only did one release. Barnes has earned enough to pay all of my bills (not that I live very extravagantly) but it's my second-most lucrative sales channel, followed closely by iBooks.


Viola, you've had phenomenal success.  However, as you know, it's atypical success. Most authors will never get where you are.

I know that if I ever pull out of Select and go with other channels, in addition to Amazon, I will expect the worst but hope for the best. In other words, I'll be realistic.


----------



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

Dan Wood said:


> People keep asking when we are going to add Google Play as a sales channel and this policy is exactly why we don't.


Very smart of you, Dan. You don't need that headache.

Sorry this happened, Viola. Good thing you got it figured out as soon as you did, though.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

emilycantore said:


> Viola, have you run a sales transaction report for Google Play to see how many bundle copies they did sell for you?
> 
> If it was going crazy on Play you may have just stopped yourself having a $5000 day with them.
> 
> Of course if it only moved a hundred copies then it's a net loss...


I don't think the reports generate until the next day. Who knows, maybe I would have had an insanely good day there, but honestly it would have to be a lot of money to compensate for all of the stress of today. I know that sounds outrageous, but I severely tightened all of my book deadlines last week, and instead of writing all day as I planned, I've been a hot mess of nerves and frustration. I've written about 500 words today and I was supposed to do 4,000. I just don't see that happening at this point.

Granted, I've probably written a good 2,000+ words on KBoards 

Yes, and while we're talking about Dan Wood, thank you so much for emailing me back so quickly earlier. Of all the stressful things I've had to deal with today, it was a breath of fresh air. <3 Draft2Digital's customer service.


----------



## kdpratt (Dec 2, 2013)

Google Play hasn't made any of my books free, but they have reduced the price and held it there forever. I wouldn't mind if I were making money there, but I'm not. I've been considering dropping Goggle Play as a distributor for a month.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Viola Rivard said:


> If GP does turn out to become a lucrative sales channel, I may invest in separate covers and slightly different names for a Google Edition.


Won't that confuse readers? Fans who may think you have written other books you're only publishing on GP?
They won't be pleased if they buy a new title, only to discover that's all they bought.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

kdpratt said:


> Google Play hasn't made any of my books free, but they have reduced the price and held it there forever. I wouldn't mind if I were making money there, but I'm not. I've been considering dropping Goggle Play as a distributor for a month.


If you check out TK's GP thread, she explains how to price your books so they get reduced to the price you want them to be 



Andrew Ashling said:


> Won't that confuse readers? Fans who may think you have written other books you're only publishing on GP?
> They won't be pleased if they buy a new title, only to discover that's all they bought.


If there's a way around that, I'll figure it out. I just need a few days, and less tequila.


----------



## bluwulf (Feb 1, 2014)

Viola Rivard said:


> Who knows, maybe I would have had an insanely good day there, but honestly it would have to be a lot of money to compensate for all of the stress of today. I know that sounds outrageous, but I severely tightened all of my book deadlines last week, and instead of writing all day as I planned, I've been a hot mess of nerves and frustration. I've written about 500 words today and I was supposed to do 4,000. I just don't see that happening at this point.
> 
> Granted, I've probably written a good 2,000+ words on KBoards


I totally understand. Maybe you just need to give yourself a break today. It's hard to focus on writing when you are mad and frustrated.


----------



## Calista Cage (Jun 25, 2014)

I was WONDERING why I went to buy your box set this morning and it was free!  I was thinking you were running some kind of promo.  I was thinking this was some kind of list-building strategy and was hoping to come here and find that it was going to eventually boost sales.  This totally sucks and I am sorry that it happened.

I get very frustrated when I see these larger companies basically toss around people like old gym socks.  Makes me steam!   

So my thinking is what can we do to make the f*cked up system work for us instead of against us?  I read a couple of ideas on how to utilize GP to an advantage.

I have never signed up to publish there, but is there the OPTION to make a title free to begin with?  And if it works that fast to Amazon to pick it up, wouldn't that be the best way to go permafree on Amazon?


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

As long as Google pays for all the books they give away, that would be fine _on its own_.

Combined with Amazon's over-reliance on automation and obsession with price matching even when they know that price wasn't intended, and it turns that practice toxic to users. These two companies are too damn aggressive with their pricing policies.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> As long as Google pays for all the books they give away, that would be fine _on its own_.
> 
> Combined with Amazon's over-reliance on automation and obsession with price matching even when they know that price wasn't intended, and it turns that practice toxic to users. These two companies are too d*mn aggressive with their pricing policies.


Rather than knee-jerking and pulling all your books, I'm sure we can use this to our advantage. I'm going to raise my prices on Google play even more. I've started making some sales there, too.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Does anyone know about how long Google usually leaves your book at $0.00 when it runs these kinds of promos? I mean, is it a few days? Two weeks? Three months? Permanent?


----------



## H. S. St. Ours (Mar 24, 2012)

Too bad. I was just starting to sell a few on GP. Ah well. It's not the pennies, it's the principle.


----------



## nobody_important (Jul 9, 2010)

Viola Rivard said:


> If Nook wasn't such a large source of revenue, I'd just go with Select after this poop. Seriously considering experimenting with serial entries on all channels and bundles in Select.


You can't do that because the books cannot be available anywhere, whether in a bundle/boxed set or individually.


----------



## nobody_important (Jul 9, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> So Google made slightly more in revenue last year than their total cash reserves of $58B, meanwhile in Seattle Amazon only pulled in $274m income from that revenue to add to their previous year cash pile of $9B. For the record Apple's cash is $159B and Microsoft $84B.
> 
> Google has bigger pockets. Amazon has big pockets. Both of them want our data. Amazon wants it to sell things to you, Google wants to sell your data. Amazon needs us more than Google and if a rival comes up on the outside (like iBookstore allowing non-Apple hardware to download iBooks thus blowing a big whole in Amazon's data stream) then Amazon has a lot less to fall back on.
> 
> Apple sell hardware, Google sell advertising, and Amazon sell everything. They are tech giants for whom books are a means to an end. Books means buyers. Buyers mean data (or hardware tie-ins for Apple). That's why Amazon is a Seattle company not a New York one. They are Tech Town not Book Town.


Having more cash doesn't necessarily mean the company's doing BETTER. It just means they have more cash.

What's important is :

1. Do they have enough to cash to pay their bills?
2. What are they doing w/ their cash?

If Amazon isn't sitting on a pile of cash because it's investing in its business, then it's good for them. They'll make some return on that.

If Amazon's isn't sitting on a pile of cash because it's too busy paying its basic bills (like workers' wages, etc.), then...well...that's not so good.

When a company's sitting on an extraordinarily large pile of cash, it may just mean the mgmt has NO CLUE what to do with the money they have (other than maybe buybacks or dividends).


----------



## Kathy Clark Author (Dec 18, 2012)

Of course thousands went to their Google Play account after reading this to see if they had the same issue..

Different symptom same root cause?

I had a book no longer being sold.


It said action needed
There was no explanation
I wrote them to see what I needed to do
They wrote back and said they had no idea

It's 11:32 PM...no word back. I did have a really crazy idea. Why not send an email to me when there is a de-listing of a book saying they de-listed it and we may not know why but look into it and if we don't know then send an email and we'll tell you then we don't know but we'll look into it.

There problem solved! Right?

Is Google like Amazon? Are they really a Federal Government high tech hiring scheme to get people off the street rather than pay unemployment? Aren't they an IT centered company?


----------



## Mark E. Cooper (May 29, 2011)

Cherise Kelley said:


> In Viola's case, this was her omnibus of all her books that her permafree is selling. In her shoes, I do not think you would be saying it didn't matter.


Probably not that it doesn't matter, no, but I wouldn't be delisting and losing all traction and future money from GP either. I truly DO feel the future is going wide, not contracting until becoming exclusive to Amazon again, especially not due to fear of losing money. How much would I lose from GP? I don't know. Currently its only a few hundred dollars a month, but the sum is growing.

I would (probably) switch that one title off, and then back on again or something. OR, list all my individual titles there but not the omni. I don't know what I would do until it happens to me, but one thing I wouldn't do (as some on this thread seem to be doing) is withdraw from GP entirely.

I don't want anyone of my friends here in the cafe to lose money, and by not using all channels they ARE losing money. I want Amazon to have competition, I want us all to use all of them and keep the industry healthy. Contracting is not healthy, going exclusive with Amazon is not healthy.


----------



## Mark E. Cooper (May 29, 2011)

H. S. St. Ours said:


> Too bad. I was just starting to sell a few on GP. Ah well. It's not the pennies, it's the principle.


No it's business. List individual titles at GP if a box set there is too risky. Please don't abandon other channels. There IS money there, and competition is good.


----------



## Andie (Jan 24, 2014)

Viola, just wanted to let you know that your bundle is showing as free on Amazon. I think you mentioned unpubbing and repubbing it, so thought I'd mention it in case you happened to be up and wanted to take it back down. 

Good luck straightening this out, and I hope that you're able to get it fixed quickly. And thanks for the warning. I'll be avoiding GP with my bundles in the future.


----------



## Carradee (Aug 21, 2010)

So sorry this happened to you, Viola. I'm on Google Play with some of my work, but I'm nowhere near bestseller lists, at this point. (Not that I'm even trying, yet.)

Personally, I have 3.5 more novels to write and 5 to edit and release before I can reasonably expect sales to start picking up. I figure that at this point in my career, Google Play's discounts don't hurt me. But when I start paying the bills with my sales? Unless the clause has changed by then, I plan to pull them.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

ShayneRutherford said:


> As I understand it, you can't put a bundle in Select if any of the pieces in the bundle are with another vendor.


Actually, that is incorrect. My bundle is in Select. The books that make it up are not. I sent an email to kdp when I thought I might have an issue, and the said that was perfectly fine.


----------



## Zelah Meyer (Jun 15, 2011)

I have deleted this post as I do not consent to the new Terms of Service that Vertical Scope are attempting to retrospectively apply to our content.  I am forced to manually replace my content as, at time of editing, their representative has instructed moderators not to delete posts or accounts when users request it, and Vertical Scope have implied that they will deal with account deletion requests by anonymising accounts, which would leave personally identifying information in my posts.

I joined under the previous ownership and have posted over the years under different Terms of Service.  I do not consent to my name, content, or intellectual properties being used by Vertical Scope or any other entity that they sell or licence my data to.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> No it's business. List individual titles at GP if a box set there is too risky. Please don't abandon other channels. There IS money there, and competition is good.


That's not how competition works. Competition is where we only do business with the companies whose terms we agree with. If we publish everywhere indiscriminately, where's the impetus for change?

Blogged about this recently. Something I thought long and hard about during BEA.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> That's not how competition works. Competition is where we only do business with the companies whose terms we agree with. If we publish everywhere indiscriminately, where's the impetus for change?
> 
> Blogged about this recently. Something I thought long and hard about during BEA.


I would amend this to "whose terms and conditions we learn to put up with through their sheer size and economic advantage to us by being listed there". There are parts of the T&C of Amazon I do not agree with, however, I grumble and sign anyway. Amazon can get away with pulling this shit because Amazon, and because there isn't a lot of other places with as high a market share.

As independent authors, we game, side-step and play the system so that the disadvantages become less problematic for us.

As other people have pointed out, GP's T&C aren't different from anyone else's.


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

I haven't read all the responses, so if this has already been brought up, ignore me. But Amazon has a similar policy. They are allowed to change the price to whatever they want at their own discretion. And Amazon's policy is kind of crappier, because if you want the 70% royalty, they'll only pay it of whatever they're selling it at, not of the list price. And for free, they don't pay you at all.

Amazon never does this with ebooks, but if you have print books, I'm sure you've seen them doing it all the time. None of my print books sell for the list price on Amazon. However, Amazon does pay me my full royalty.

Anyway, at any point in time, Amazon _could_ start changing prices at a whim. Just throwing that out there.


----------



## Bluebonnet (Dec 15, 2013)

Andie said:


> Viola, just wanted to let you know that your bundle is showing as free on Amazon. I think you mentioned unpubbing and repubbing it, so thought I'd mention it in case you happened to be up and wanted to take it back down.
> 
> Good luck straightening this out, and I hope that you're able to get it fixed quickly. And thanks for the warning. I'll be avoiding GP with my bundles in the future.


Are you talking about Viola's bundle "Claimed by the Alphas"? It's showing at $3.99 on Amazon this morning.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

Patty Jansen said:


> As other people have pointed out, GP's T&C aren't different from anyone else's.


Agreed. But terms and conditions are only half of what matters. The other half is the actual behavior.

Kobo & Amazon ask for us to opt in to discounts and promotions, even though they have the ability to discount as they see fit. If Kobo started doing this, I'd pull my books from their site immediately. But they are smart enough not to do anything like this. As someone else pointed out, it's all about seeing authors as partners or as pawns.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

Hugh Howey said:


> Agreed. But terms and conditions are only half of what matters. The other half is the actual behavior.


Exactly. We can pick apart the ts&cs of all the distributors and find similar clauses. It's not simply a question of can they do these things, but will they?



Andie said:


> Viola, just wanted to let you know that your bundle is showing as free on Amazon. I think you mentioned unpubbing and repubbing it, so thought I'd mention it in case you happened to be up and wanted to take it back down.
> 
> Good luck straightening this out, and I hope that you're able to get it fixed quickly. And thanks for the warning. I'll be avoiding GP with my bundles in the future.


Yes, I had to republish it to get Zon to manually price it back up. Took a few more hours and around 600 more free downloads. The silver lining is that I handled it pretty well on Facebook, and I gained a lot of new fans yesterday. Also got like 100 mailing list signups, so waking up today, I don't feel like it was a total loss. I still don't know how it's going to impact algorithms though. I've been sticking to the top 700-1,000 with the title for over a month. It may take some promos to get it back up there. I'm just going to focus on writing this weekend and see how it pans out on Monday.



Mark E. Cooper said:


> Probably not that it doesn't matter, no, but I wouldn't be delisting and losing all traction and future money from GP either. I truly DO feel the future is going wide, not contracting until becoming exclusive to Amazon again, especially not due to fear of losing money. How much would I lose from GP? I don't know. Currently its only a few hundred dollars a month, but the sum is growing.


You're right in that it was probably rash of me to make the decision to pull everything. I was very upset and distraught to see what was nearly my entire catalogue being given away. I don't see any problem with listing free or 99 cent titles there, and when I'm feeling less burned, I'll probably do so. I will, however, either put competitor links in my books, or if they get savvy to that, link readers back to my website where I can link them to the rest of my catalogue.

I did go ahead and change the name of the thread, due to this. That being said, I won't be listing anything more than 99 cents with them unless I can find a major workaround to their clause. While lots of authors with big catalogues may be able to take the hit on this, my business model revolves around small, cheap serial entries to remain visible and bundles to bring in large income. If my bundle/s are made free, it screws me over.


----------



## S. Elliot Brandis (Dec 9, 2013)

When you think about it, this is as much the fault of Amazon (and their price matching policy) as it is Google. Google discount a book but still pay full royalty. Amazon change the price of your book, without your consent, and pay you only a proportion of the new price. The only reason we side with Amazon on this is because they're the majority of our business. In terms of the actual business ethics, Google are offering the better deal.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

And for those wondering how much I made on Google Play yesterday, for the 16 hours it was live and free there, I "sold" 3 copies for a total of $8.07.

Not even considering the 2,200 free copies given away on Amazon, just compared to the $400/day average revenue from Amazon, it stinks.

This is one of the rare times where I regret that I share the amount of money I earn, because I know a lot of people are thinking 'You make thousands of dollars a week, does it really matter that much?' and I understand that, believe me I do, but that's probably why I've handled this without having a meltdown. For me, it just means that I'm not going to reach my goal for the month, and theres a rather annoying blip in my obsessively tracked reports, but to authors making a few thousand a month an upset like this can be particularly damaging, especially if they don't notice as quickly as I did. Zon didn't put my book back up to $3.99 just because the GP listing was removed. I was up until 4 am this morning working with support. How long would it have stayed that way if I hadn't noticed? Until a day after the promo ended? When would the promo have even ended? Too many questions, not enough answers, and in the meantime, authors are bleeding money.

And another thing that concerns me, what's to stop them from doing a free promo on a new release? Can you imagine how devastating it would be to a book launch if Zon price matched a new release to free?


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2014)

Viola Rivard said:


> This is one of the rare times where I regret that I share the amount of money I earn, because I know a lot of people are thinking 'You make thousands of dollars a week, does it really matter that much?'


I'm not one of those people thinking that. If I were you, I'd be pissed off too. Don't screw with my money.


----------



## bluwulf (Feb 1, 2014)

Agree with everything Viola - and even if you are making thousands of dollars a week - $400 a day adds up pretty quick.  Who can say how long Google Play would have kept it free?

You are lucky you caught it quickly.


----------



## Evan J (Feb 3, 2014)

Viola Rivard said:


> And for those wondering how much I made on Google Play yesterday, for the 16 hours it was live and free there, I "sold" 3 copies for a total of $8.07.
> 
> Not even considering the 2,200 free copies given away on Amazon, just compared to the $400/day average revenue from Amazon, it stinks.


OMG that's awful!!! I guess Google wasn't able to drive much traffic to their site by doing this. A good lesson for them as well.


----------



## 75910 (Mar 16, 2014)

I've been following this thread since yesterday and I have to say that I'm surprised Google put the price of Viola's book down to free. Isn't this a violation of their *OWN TOS?* It clearly states that any book that is 18+ must have a price of at least 99 cents so it doesn't fall into the hands of minors I imagine. (as if many teenagers don't have a credit card but that's another thread)


----------



## Mark E. Cooper (May 29, 2011)

Olivia Jaymes said:


> I've been following this thread since yesterday and I have to say that I'm surprised Google put the price of Viola's book down to free. Isn't this a violation of their *OWN TOS?* It clearly states that any book that is 18+ must have a price of at least 99 cents so it doesn't fall into the hands of minors I imagine. (as if many teenagers don't have a credit card but that's another thread)


Hmmm, not sure but I wonder if you set 18+ in the dashboard (the option is there) whether that will prevent or discourage these pricing things.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

Olivia Jaymes said:


> I've been following this thread since yesterday and I have to say that I'm surprised Google put the price of Viola's book down to free. Isn't this a violation of their *OWN TOS?* It clearly states that any book that is 18+ must have a price of at least 99 cents so it doesn't fall into the hands of minors I imagine. (as if many teenagers don't have a credit card but that's another thread)


That's interesting. I'm not familiar with that clause, but honestly, being that I'm not a lawyer, most of their ts&cs may as well be written in Babylonian. My books were definitely listed as 18+.


----------



## Mark E. Cooper (May 29, 2011)

Viola Rivard said:


> That's interesting. I'm not familiar with that clause, but honestly, being that I'm not a lawyer, most of their ts&cs may as well be written in Babylonian. My books were definitely listed as 18+.


Ah damn, another theory blown out of the water.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> Ah d*mn, another theory blown out of the water.


Sorry :[


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

Thank you for posting about this. I took my book off GP today because I do not want to give away the control of putting it free. So sorry about what happened. I hope sales are returning over on Amazon.


----------



## Lionel&#039;s Mom (Aug 22, 2013)

I'm not sure, but I think the price thing for 18+ is for books with naughty pictures, not just racy stories.


----------



## ChristopherDavidPetersen (Mar 24, 2011)

Just stumbled onto this thread...  I too am a victim of Google's BS pricing policy. The second they lowered the price of one of my books without my permission, I IMMEDIATELY pulled all my books from their catalog (as well as sent them a scathing letter). I only hope more people complain and force them to make changes (I wouldn't mind relisting my books with them again someday).


----------



## Leanne King (Oct 2, 2012)

ChristopherDavidPetersen said:


> The second they lowered the price of one of my books *without my permission*


Not picking on you personally, but people keep saying Google are doing this without permission, and that's simply not true. You gave them permission to sell your book at any price they feel like ($0 is a price) when you accepted their terms. It's there in black and white (clause 3.4). It might suck that they choose to implement their right to set the price as they want, but nobody should be surprised if they do.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

Pelagios said:


> Not picking on you personally, but people keep saying Google are doing this without permission, and that's simply not true. You gave them permission to sell your book at any price they feel like ($0 is a price) when you accepted their terms. It's there in black and white (clause 3.4). It might suck that they choose to implement their right to set the price as they want, but nobody should be surprised if they do.


I think you're beating a dead horse. We all understand that we're signing these rights over to ebook retailers. As self-published authors, we all have to agree to these contracts in order to sell our books and make money. The reason this whole situation is "surprising" people is that other retailers aren't doing it. At this time, GP is the only one exercising this right, and what authors didn't realize was the impact that this would have across other, more lucrative sales channels. The point of this is to say "Yes, you may have the right to do _____ because of the contract we have to sign to publish with you, but we also have the right to pull our titles if you exercise this right in a manner that is financially damaging to us."

Due to the clause, I can't sue GP because they inadvertently gave away nearly $6,000 worth of my product, but I sure as heck can pull my products from them and bring awareness of the policy to other authors, and that's what the thread is about.


----------



## Andie (Jan 24, 2014)

Glad you were able to get it fixed, Viola. I hope you don't have too many new gray hairs because of it.


----------



## Bluebonnet (Dec 15, 2013)

Viola Rivard said:


> I think you're beating a dead horse. We all understand that we're signing these rights over to ebook retailers. As self-published authors, we all have to agree to these contracts in order to sell our books and make money. The reason this whole situation is "surprising" people is that other retailers aren't doing it. At this time, GP is the only one exercising this right, and what authors didn't realize was the impact that this would have across other, more lucrative sales channels. The point of this is to say "Yes, you may have the right to do _____ because of the contract we have to sign to publish with you, but we also have the right to pull our titles if you exercise this right in a manner that is financially damaging to us."
> 
> Due to the clause, I can't sue GP because they inadvertently gave away nearly $6,000 worth of my product, but I sure as heck can pull my products from them and bring awareness of the policy to other authors, and that's what the thread is about.


Viola, you did the right thing. I appreciate your posts.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

I don't plan to pull my books at this time, but I don't have any of my boxed sets in there, so if book is made free, all is not lost. However, I'm glad to be made aware of that this is happening so I can check my prices every day. I found GP was great for doing a limited free run that was twice as long as Select allows, and I had control of when it went free and when it went back to paid. Amazon cooperated too, so it was a very smooth price-match promo. 

Has anyone tried to jack up their price after GP makes it free? Like changing the book to $48 dollars or something?


----------



## S. Elliot Brandis (Dec 9, 2013)

DTW said:


> I don't know what the British / European retail climate is like, but one of THE most common facets of American retail is price matching. Amazon didn't invent it, and saying 'this is Amazon's fault' is, to be polite, wrong. Grocery stores, electronics stores, hardware stores, department stores; in America, you see companies doing price matching all the time. Some even price match plus a percentage (telling customers they can come in with the receipt and the other store's ad to get refunded the difference plus some extra percentage as a bonus). It's a very common competition point. Amazon is an American company, and they're doing what is extremely common (and legal) in America.
> 
> As El pointed out above though, the difference between ordinary price matching and indie book price matching is ordinary involves the store having ALREADY BOUGHT the price matched item. If Lawnmower A1 is being sold by the manufacturer for $90, and Home Depot wants to charge cost for it, that's Home Depot's problem. All the retailers selling Lawnmower A1 have already paid the manufacturer; so the retailers are free to fight amongst themselves over how much (if any) profit any of them are making off model A1 to their hearts' content. The manufacturer got paid already; they don't care.
> 
> But indie authors only get paid post-sale; which makes the price charged for the item EXTREMELY relevant. Price games by the etailers is going to do the opposite of encouraging indies to post their titles on multiple storefronts. Viola's re-consolidation of her titles back to Amazon is the ONLY rational move for her to make in this circumstance. She has proven sales -- money in her account each month -- from Amazon. What's her motivation to abandon that in the name of 'fair competition'? She's looking to get paid. We all are. That's the point of being an author working through a storefront (any storefront). If we didn't want to get paid, we'd just put up a website and provide epubs for free download. We don't; we put them up for SALE.


Which is my point. They are changing how much we sell our product to them without our consent. Its not the same as regular price matching, which is fine and dandy.

But, if course, they're the Big Daddy so we have to grit our teeth and find a way to work with it. I feel for Viola.


----------



## 69959 (May 14, 2013)

It seems like every time I turn around, I hear another indie who's having similar issues with Google.  I'm going to keep a close eye out on my google titles. I've already had price matching issues before I bookmarked the thread here with the prices.

For some reason, I haven't been able to get Google Play to publish my box set. Now I'm glad.


----------



## Alexandra Lynwood (Dec 4, 2013)

Pelagios said:


> Not picking on you personally, but people keep saying Google are doing this without permission, and that's simply not true. You gave them permission to sell your book at any price they feel like ($0 is a price) when you accepted their terms. It's there in black and white (clause 3.4). It might suck that they choose to implement their right to set the price as they want, but nobody should be surprised if they do.


Actually you could argue that $0.00 is not a price, it is by definition a lack of price. A contract has to have consideration to be valid - consideration would be the concept of "I give you this, and in return you get that".

That lack of a price could theoretically scramble any contract you have with Google, but they've covered their asses on that point by still paying you your owed money and eating the loss on the sale. At least I think that's right, long time since I studied contract law


----------



## Lummox JR (Jul 1, 2012)

It all boils down to courtesy. People who are making gobs of money on Amazon don't want Google exercising their right to price as they see fit at all, but if Google's going to do it, they should at least offer authors a heads-up and enough time to get out of it--whether that means opting out (the nicer option) or pulling their books entirely if need be. Springing it on them without warning just isn't acceptable, given the nature of the relationship between the author and the distributor.

If Google had given Viola and other authors who got hit by this situation a chance to pull their books before the promotion, there might have been mild grumbling about having to pull the books instead of opting out, but not nearly as much kerfuffle as there has been because Google wouldn't have wound up costing authors large amounts of money.

Bottom line: Any time someone does something that pulls $400 out of my pocket without warning, I'm gonna be pretty POed about it.


----------



## 75814 (Mar 12, 2014)

Yeah, I'm beginning to think Google Play isn't a good choice if they're going to do this kind of thing. I'll keep permafree and backlist titles on there, but new releases won't go up.


----------



## S. Elliot Brandis (Dec 9, 2013)

Do they just do this with Indies? I wonder how it would go down if the same thing happened for a trad pub book...


----------



## ricola (Mar 3, 2014)

S. Elliot Brandis said:


> Do they just do this with Indies? I wonder how it would go down if the same thing happened for a trad pub book...


I'm sure they do.


----------



## LBrent (Jul 1, 2013)

Gertie Kindle 'a/k/a Margaret Lake' said:


> Good decision. What a nightmare!


Yup.

Now that I see what a catastrophe could happen nevermind adding them.

[[[Viola]]]


----------



## Mike_Author (Oct 19, 2013)

Authors should boycott GP until they change this policy.  I am trying to think of another business model where a retailer can give your products away for free and you don't get paid (ie - they are building market share using OUR money, not their own).  Hopefully the media picks up on this soon.

However this is easy for me to say. After hours and hours of trying, I couldn't even work out how to publish a book because their interface was so bad!

Put simply, this is disgraceful.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Mike_Author said:


> Authors should boycott GP until they change this policy. I am trying to think of another business model where a retailer can give your products away for free and you don't get paid (ie - they are building market share using OUR money, not their own). Hopefully the media picks up on this soon.
> 
> However this is easy for me to say. After hours and hours of trying, I couldn't even work out how to publish a book because their interface was so bad!
> 
> Put simply, this is disgraceful.


Throughout this thread, people have been saying over and over again that it's actually Amazon that gives you book away without you getting paid. If GP gives your book away, you WILL be paid.


----------



## CJArcher (Jan 22, 2011)

Thanks to you and the other authors who've brought this to our attention. I'm sorry it had to happen to you! I'll be watching my books on GP very closely now.


----------



## Worde Smith (Aug 27, 2013)

A fellow author pointed me to this thread. The only title I have over at GP is my perma-free. I guaran-d*mn-tee I won't be putting anything up there for sale!

Glad to see your work is back to $3.99 at Amazon...


----------



## christianem (Sep 15, 2013)

Thanks for sharing your experience, Viola. My books are off GP now - I just can't afford to risk having them set any of my paid books to free and have Amazon price-match it.


----------



## Desmond X. Torres (Mar 16, 2013)

GPlay accounts for 25% of my royalties for the last two months. I've been there since December, that growth went from basically zilch in March. So they're a serious part of my income stream.

And that's about the only good thing I can say about doing business with them.

The workflow process is difficult to understand (without TK's post, I wouldn't have done it at all). Trying to find answers to fundamental questions is frustrating and time consuming. I haven't had the opportunity to correspond with them, but I expect to find it just as difficult. Comparing their interface with Amazon, Smashwords, and Create Space I have to conclude that they really could care less. The sense I get of their attitude is 'Here's our system, you figure it out'.

If they didn't have the penetration into the marketplace, I'd dump them, but frankly, I can't afford to. Oh well.

Or maybe&#8230; NOT YET.

I don't begrudge any writer any success they've achieved. Frankly, Viola, you've really picked up the torch here on K Boards that earlier members have sort of passed over in terms of mentorship and guidance. It's to your credit as a person, and the community (including MEEE!) has benefited.

*Plug for Viola time:*
I never read her genre with respect to shape shifting romance. The concept did not appeal to me at all. She put up her post a few months ago, and I grabbed the perma free, read it in an afternoon, and now have bought about four of her books. So far.

She has created a different world where the supernatural and natural co-exist. This world is as accessible as the world of Westeros that George RR Martin created that I've watched on HBO. Like any good book, within just a few pages, you're in that world. If you haven't given her work a whirl (ESPECIALLY if you think the genre's not for you) I hope you do. If your experience is anything like mine, you're in for an enjoyable experience.

End of plug

The absurdity that they would shaft someone who has a rep on Kboards like you do is astonishing. 'Cuz when you say something, well&#8230; a lot of people listen, you know? The financial hit you took borders on mean spirited- as opposed to 'just business as usual'.

I want to point out two issues raised in this thread that I think deserve contemplation:

The less important one is the contradiction of their own TOS that you and Mark Cooper raised. I don't have the TOS in front of me, but there was a thing that we HAD to price at .99 if it was for 18 and older. But yet they dropped you to zero. A case could be made that they owe you money, because as I see it they shouldn't have dropped you below .99.

Giving away adult oriented material? Hmmm&#8230; I'm surprised that this hasn't been picked up in the press.

The more important issue that my Spidey Sense is going on about since I read this thread yesterday is this:

(I think it bears discussion. I was tempted to start another thread on this, but since this post is the genesis for my train of thought, I'm leaving it here for now.)

It's GPlay's overall attitude on this matter. 'Hey, these are the TOS you agreed to'. 'Hey, YOU figure out how to deal with us'. 'We're going to do whatever we want to make us money&#8230; if it totally screws up your efforts, well, tough luck, there's thousands of other authors out there'.

Hmmm&#8230; 
While never being Traditionally Published (Konrath scared me off from even SUBMITTING two and a half years ago), I have read a lot of tales from that dark side, okay?

And is it just me, but am I the only one who sees a degree of parallel between GPlay's attitude and the worst we've all heard about in the Trad Pub world? 
(Sorry for the long post, but this has been on my mind for the last two days)


----------



## BillSmithBooksDotCom (Nov 4, 2012)

I read this story and I think that Mark Coker was right all along in insisting that publishers and authors ought to be given the Agency model by all ebook retailers. 

Or, at the very least, the author/publisher ought to be able to set a "wholesale" price for all ebook retailers that they must be paid for every copy sold and if the retailer wants to discount, that is their business.


----------



## Lummox JR (Jul 1, 2012)

BillSmithBooksDotCom said:


> I read this story and I think that Mark Coker was right all along in insisting that publishers and authors ought to be given the Agency model by all ebook retailers.


The agency model is part of an outdated system that's doomed to crumble. It's foolish to keep chucking eggs into that basket. Propping it up any longer will just delay the inevitable and make the fall that much harder.



> Or, at the very least, the author/publisher ought to be able to set a "wholesale" price for all ebook retailers that they must be paid for every copy sold and if the retailer wants to discount, that is their business.


Here's the problem, though: We negotiate prices separately with each vendor. Unless that wholesale price was published, there'd be no way for a vendor to know they weren't being screwed. When Amazon sees a price differential at another vendor, they assume we set the price that way because they have no better info to go on. And even if they can be sure we didn't do the discount, they're still forced to aggressively price match.

If Amazon had to accept a scheme like the agency model or wholesaling for indie publishers, the direct result would be lower royalties. No thanks.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

All we can effectively do is pull our books off any vendor that discounts but doesn't sell.


----------



## Carina Wilder (Nov 12, 2013)

Thanks for posting this, Viola. I've been following it as closely as I could given a nutty schedule and it's invaluable information that you've imparted. I haven't/hadn't yet put anything on GP and will be very hesitant to do so now.

I do hope your posting this raises awareness enough for something to change.


----------



## Guest (Jun 29, 2014)

Lummox:

Agency price is perhaps the confusing term here.
Retailers are used to "wholesale" price. Macy's buys dresses at a certain wholesale price. The designer/manufacturer knows exactly his/her cut,
Since Macy's "bought" the dresses, Macy's can now sell the dresses at any price it chooses. Only Macy's profit margin is affected, not the designer/manufacturer.
That is fair. Retailers have used the model for a long time.
Amazon, in our case, is not a true retailer. Amazon acts as a consignment shop. It is risking nothing. It can discount our book to 0 without suffering a loss.
But the author loses. He/she has given the work away, with no say-so in the matter.
Now when Amazon cuts the price to 0, then it is no longer a "consignment" shop. That's because if we take our book to a true consignment shop, we set the price we will accept.
So we, the writers, are left with a situation in which we have lost control over our products. We don't have a sales contract. We have Terms of Service established by only one side in a business arrangement. It can only be changed by one side.
I think the time will come when Congress will take a look at this "business" practice.


----------



## RinG (Mar 12, 2013)

I have to say Viola, I love your priorities. Glad you sorted it out.


----------



## I Give Up (Jan 27, 2014)

You guys flatter me. While I may seem like a big deal on the boards, I'm a blip on the radar to most distributors. There are a lot of authors that make way more money than I do, and the most my name really commands is quicker publishing times and faster responses. I brought this issue here mainly because 1. I was mad, 2. I wanted others to be aware of it, and 3. Because my complaint alone isn't enough to change anything.

Honestly, I doubt either company is going to change their policy because of this, but at least everyone is aware of it now. I don't have the time to fight the powers that be, I have two books to write next week, and then a whole 'nother serial to begin the week after, not to mention launches, promotions, and social media and my whole schedule is outta whack now. More than anything, I'm upset that my time has been wasted on this matter, and that I can no longer list my most lucrative products on what was previously a promising sales channel.


----------



## Laurelkh (Jun 10, 2014)

Viola, oh my goodness! I know this is not exactly related, but I went into Amazon Best Sellers > Two-Hour Science Fiction & Fantasy Short Reads, and your _Bound to the Alpha: Part Two_ is in the #1 (paid) slot!!! Congratulations! Maybe the GP mistake really will have a happy ending for you?


----------



## Lummox JR (Jul 1, 2012)

Okey Dokey said:


> Agency price is perhaps the confusing term here.
> Retailers are used to "wholesale" price. Macy's buys dresses at a certain wholesale price. The designer/manufacturer knows exactly his/her cut,
> Since Macy's "bought" the dresses, Macy's can now sell the dresses at any price it chooses. Only Macy's profit margin is affected, not the designer/manufacturer.
> That is fair. Retailers have used the model for a long time.
> ...


I wouldn't be sad to see ToS become less one-sided somehow, though I don't trust Congress to do it.

But as much as the wholesale model has its benefits, I think it's completely incompatible with both Amazon's 70% royalty system and their aggressive price matching. They simply can't do both. Given the reach Amazon has and the ability to make our books show up alongside trad-pub bestsellers, I can't feel too broken up that they use a different model. If the time ever comes when that's a serious issue for me, I suspect the market will be completely different by then anyway.


----------

