Re: amazon and filtering

At 12:43 PM -0500 3/30/08, Elizabeth Burton wrote:
>Kent,
>
>LSI places a barcode on the last page of every book to ensure the
>right interior gets with the right book cover. So, yes, there is a way
>for Amazon--and anyone else--to tell if the book was printed there.


You are right. I had forgotten the internal barcode.

Perhaps LSI can be persuaded to ditch it somehow?

Even with it, I doubt Amazon has an automated way to check -- so books coming in an unexpected way will likely slip by, at least initially. If I sell LSI-printed books to Baker & Taylor or Ingram under a normal wholesale account (i.e., non-POD account), which then ships them to Amazon, will Amazon realize that they came from LSI? I doubt it. I think Amazon's system has to be so automated, that they never open the books to see the barcode.

And, remember that Amazon has both Ingram and B&T dropship books for them, so they may never have the books on hand to see the LSI barcode.


>
>A 55% discount is standard for the print publishing industry. Cries
>that Amazon is a vendor not a distributor don't hold water--they
>distribute to their various overseas warehouses, which is a costly
>proposition even given LSI books can be printed in the UK.


Really?

What evidence do you have that Amazon does this?

The pages for LSI titles on foreign Amazon's make me believe the contrary. It looks to me like aggressive exporters/importers are the source for Amazon's listings of POD titles overseas, because most of the sales are by Marketplace vendors and not by Amazon itself. The only exception I saw was in Europe, where Amazon supplier Libri.de seems to be the source of the stock that Amazon itself is selling.

If I'm wrong, please show me some evidence to tell me that I'm wrong.



>Many of the
>publishers who are shouting so loudly are either self-publishing
>authors or ebook publishers who offer print if their authors so
>desire. They give LSI a short discount, apparently not understanding
>that gets passed down the artery, and which means Amazon may well be
>losing money on most if not all sales of their books. Amazon decided
>to kill the free ride. TANSTAAFL.


I think if that was all it was about, Amazon would have simply added an additional amount over the list price to books that had discounts too slim. IMO, this is all about getting market share for BookSurge vs. LSI.


>
>Finally, I find it ironic that people are protesting the very thing
>that makes print-on-demand different from offset/web: it can eliminate
>the middle man.


Really? I thought POD was all about eliminating inventory. While I think that eliminating the middleman can be a benefit, I don't think it is entirely realistic, especially in the relatively short term (5 years plus).


>Yes, you'll pay for the privilege, but, well, see
>previous paragraph. Amazon says we have a perfectly capable printing
>plant. If the POD books come from there, we can have them as soon as
>we need them (Amazon orders have priority at the Booksurge shop) and
>we can make more money from them. AMAZON won't benefit directly from
>the printing costs--that goes to Booksurge. Amazon is prepared to
>commit resources to provide FREE transfer of all book files to
>Booksurge, and unlike LSI they to date haven't charged an annual
>storage fee. Anyone care to estimate how much that's going to cost in
>employee hours?


This seems to me to be a good point. I haven't heard that this is true, but if BookSurge will do the file transfer for free, then, given BookSurge's pricing, it seems like it is a pretty good deal.

The real problem left with BookSurge is simply that it doesn't have the more universal distribution that LSI gets through Ingram.

Part of the problem here is that those complaining about Amazon's recent efforts either seem to think that they need to use one POD printer exclusively, or object to the effort required to use more than one.

I do think that to get maximum distribution using many different POD printers will be required -- if for no other reason than to be able to offer books globally. At the moment, LSI/Ingram does manage to give significant distribution, but there are plenty of holes.



>
>Notice how that part tends to get lost in the Amazon-as-bully rhetoric?
>
>IOW, everybody shouting for revolution seems determined to overlook
>that Amazon certainly has a right to decide the terms under which
>they'll do business, are not obligated to take constant revenue losses
>to be nice to a slew of presses and authors who may sell half a dozen
>copies a year and have actually committed significant resources to
>making the transition as easy as possible.

True enough.

But I think the objection is the heavy-handedness Amazon is using in this case. As I said above, they could have simply raised the prices on the items in question, while not raising the prices if the book comes through BookSurge. I don't think that would have been seen as quite as unfriendly as threatening publishers with a loss of business.

And then there is the whole question of whether Amazon could be violating anti-trust laws by these activities. IANAL, and I'm not at all sure that there is, but I think Amazon could easily annoy some customers enough that they might file suit.


>
>Do I think the whole thing could have been handled better? I thought
>so at first, but then I thought about how likely success would have
>been if Amazon had contacted these same publishers and ASKED them to
>pretty-please place their POD files with Booksurge. For all I know,
>they did, and I can imagine how useful it was.


You are right.

But what is the best way to get business? By threatening someone with the loss of business? or by offering a better value? I'd much rather Amazon offer me better value -- by giving me either comparable distribution, or the ability to set more flexible discounts or both.

I would love for BookSurge to be a viable competitor to LSI -- any market deserves good competition.

But forcing me to use the service, instead of improving the service so that it is attractive, isn't going to make many friends or loyal customers.


>
>Now I'm being chastised elsewhere for refusing to join in a boycott of
>all things Amazon. I'm a traitor to the cause, insensitive to the
>rights and feelings of my fellow authors and publishers. Never mind
>that I may be the only one there in possession of the above noted
>facts--among others. It's the principle of the thing.


I'm not going to condemn you. I think you are thinking through this reasonably. I just disagree with a lot of your logic (but not all of it). I'm sure you will write back and disagree with a lot of what I've said above.

I'm sure we can agree to disagree after a good, and hopefully productive, discussion.


Kent


------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------
Post a message:   ebook-community [[at]] *
Unsubscribe:      ebook-community-unsubscribe [[at]] *
Switch to digest: ebook-community-digest [[at]] *
Switch to normal: ebook-community-normal [[at]] *
Put mail on hold: ebook-community-nomail [[at]] *
Administrator:    ebook-community-owner [[at]] *

(* == yahoogroups.com)
-------------------------------------------------------Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ebook-community/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ebook-community/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:ebook-community-fullfeatured-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    ebook-community-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/