NYT: “Amazon Pulls Thousands of E-Books in Dispute”
Is Amazon getting to the point where it can say, “Publishers, we don’t need your e-books”?
Generally, when Amazon has disputed with a publisher, the publisher has won. That was true on the Agency Model, it was true on text-to-speech.
Now, though, Amazon has told the Independent Publishers Group that if IPG doesn’t agree to Amazon’s terms, Amazon won’t carry their e-books.
In the short term, I don’t like that (as a reader). Amazon used to say that a goal was for the Kindle to bring us “Every book ever published…”
Obviously, they can’t do that if they refuse to carry books.
On the other hand, what if the only way for Amazon to do that profitably is to charge $15 for some e-books? They already do that…what about $25? $50?
Is it better for readers in the long term for Amazon to force prices down by getting better terms?
I do think Amazon certainly has the right to only get books under the conditions they want. As a former store manager, I know that’s part of the process.
As a reader, I want to be able to make the decision about getting any book…even if it does cost more.
As you can tell, I’m kind of torn on this one. My emotional, short term, gut reaction is I want the books to be in the store. My analytical, long term, logical mind wants publishers to have a check and balance on them.
What do you think about this one? Feel free to let me know…
This post by Bufo Calvin originally appeared in the I Love My Kindle blog.