Apple Settles State and Consumer Class Action E-Book Price Fixing Lawsuit

[sofila]

I'm not feeling shortsighted. I look beyond the names involved, I see a company found guilty for fixing ebook prices (raising prices for final consumers). I see the same company reaching out of court settlements. And I see some guys trying to explain me that an higher price was better in the end. I live on another planet, different from yours.

 

[BaldiMac]

I'm not feeling shortsighted. I look beyond the names involved, I see a company found guilty for fixing ebook prices (raising prices for final consumers).

More accurately, a company found liable in a civil trial for colluding to raise eBook prices. A decision that they are appealing.

I see the same company reaching out of court settlements.

A settlement contingent on their appeals of the DOJ case. If there appeals succeed, they pay nothing through the settlement.

And I see some guys trying to explain me that an higher price was better in the end. I live on another planet, different from yours.

Evidently, a planet where you ignore the counter arguments in favor your own gross over-simplification of the issues.

 

[sofila]

Ok I give up. Sorry I wasted your time. It's my poor English that leads me to raw and rough simplifications. Bye.

 

[mw360]

So? Amazon's is looking out for the consumer by lowering prices, how is that a bad thing? They're fighting the greedy corporations and writers. Apple was just looking to inflate prices so they could get their cut.

Looking out for consumers? You get 3$ off the price of a book and they get to dominate the entire books market, to the point of being only a shade away from simply owning books as a concept. The books, the ebooks, the ebook readers, the publishers and the authors are all owned by Amazon. Who got the better deal?

 

[fredaroony]

Ok I give up. Sorry I wasted your time. It's my poor English that leads me to raw and rough simplifications. Bye.

Apple clearly was in the wrong in this case and the fact that posters in here are arguing keeping prices higher for the consumers isn't a negative is inane.

 

[sofila]

You should give up as it's pointless having a discussion with that poster. You will only get responses spun in Apple's favour regardless of what conspired.

Apple clearly was in the wrong in this case and the fact that posters in here are arguing keeping prices higher for the consumers isn't a negative is inane.

Thanks, let me recall my first word in this thread : "funny"

 

[Oletros]

Amazon wanted to sell loss leader products and transfer the cost reductions to copyright owners and not compensate them for their work since under the Amazon model the owner gets a percentage of actual sale price, even if it is $1 or $0.

Wrong, in Amazon wholesale model they payed the whole price to the publishers

 

[Tumbleweed666]

I think you are missing the point or just don't want to acknowledge it. Do you understand that selling below cost is unsustainable? I'm prepared for another non-answer...

No it's not unsustainable, though I don't see why it matters, if it is, it will come to a natural end.
But unless you sell everything under cost all the time then selling some things under cost at some times may actually make sense. I presume you are familiar with the concept of loss leaders ?

Something else that Amazon do is sell a book at low cost for a few weeks or months to bump it up the charts,then raise the price once it's up in the charts and got more good reviews. I've seen that happen with several books by little or unknown authors I've bought which I would never have bought at full price. Given them a good or bad review,some have flown and become massive sellers later on which they may not have done.

So, to simplistically say that selling under cost isn't sustainable is a non realistic comment that doesn't apply to the real world which is more complex than either things are always sold under cost or never are and never change one way or another. Though what the cost of an eBook is, is an interesting conundrum also.

----------

Looking out for consumers? You get 3$ off the price of a book and they get to dominate the entire books market, to the point of being only a shade away from simply owning books as a concept. The books, the ebooks, the ebook readers, the publishers and the authors are all owned by Amazon. Who got the better deal?

On that basis all books should be sold at five hundred dollars each.

 

[WallToWallMacs]

Funny to see all these "consumers" who can't see beyond their own wallet. How much more did an average consumer on a tight budget pay under agency pricing? $5? Maybe $10? Going by the amounts of the refunds that people have posted, probably less than that. Personally, I didn't buy a single eBook.

I think that encouraging quality and diversity of content is a good thing. I think that consolidating all the power over an industry as culturally important as the book industry in a corporation like Amazon is bad.

As much as the anti-Apple position would like to pretend that Apple actions resulted in an increase in price over the price established by a free market, the reality is that the pre-Apple market rate was set by Amazon, and Amazon alone. The post-Apple market rate was set by dozens of competing publishers. I prefer a more competitive market.

I also think it was hypocritical of the DOJ to go after an alleged conspiracy of publishers that made up 40% of the market and then turn around and approve the merger of the top 2 publishers to give them control of more than 30% of the market.

What I think is funny is how many here split 'consumer' and 'employee' as apparently different 'beings' - Ford realised that if you didn't have employees with a good income then they cannot go out and by said product that they were making. If someone is driving down the price to the point that making books (be they ebooks or physical) uneconomical then who benefits in the end? the downward pressure has to be absorbed some how - lower wages, people exiting the market because you cannot make a living off writing etc. but apparently that is all good for consumers.

 

[rhett7660]

What I think is funny is how many here split 'consumer' and 'employee' as apparently different 'beings' - Ford realised that if you didn't have employees with a good income then they cannot go out and by said product that they were making. If someone is driving down the price to the point that making books (be they ebooks or physical) uneconomical then who benefits in the end? the downward pressure has to be absorbed some how - lower wages, people exiting the market because you cannot make a living off writing etc. but apparently that is all good for consumers.

Exactly. I am all good with getting my goods for a low price, but I don't want to get them so cheap that it causes no more goods to be made or produced.