Eddy Cue Speaks About iBooks Price-Fixing Case: 'We Feel We Have to Fight for the Truth'

[jkichline]

That's not illegal.

Great, what are fighting? You admitted it. I give you credit for that.

It's not illegal to raise prices or create a system that would allow prices to rise. The only way it can be found to be illegal is if they were colluding with publishers. That's the real issue. Truth is that the publishers wanted out of the bad relationship with Amazon and flocked to Apple and then ditched Amazon because they wanted to raise prices on things that are worth money.

In this case, I believe that Apple was doing the right thing. Sure the books may cost more, but they are worth more. Better quality and it helps creating individuals instead of trivializing the creative process.

Amazon is the monopoly here and needs to be taken down.

 

[gavroche]

What has to do having less revenue with being harmful or not to consumers?

That was harmful to consumers because they killed competition and raised the prices even if they got less per book.

They did not kill competition. Unless you honestly think that having only Amazon selling ebooks was *more* competition. And you cannot hide behind the fact that Amazon was selling many at a loss in order to gain market share to justify this fact. That was not a sustainable situation. Do you honestly think that they would have continued doing that? Really? If so, i would suggest that you do not remember when Amazon started as a company. They sold so many products, including physical books, at a loss in order to become a name brand company. I remember them inundating the market with 20%-30% off any item coupons for a very long time. Amazon lost a lot of money for years before making a dime. They were okay with this, because it helped them become a household name. They do not do this any more. They would not have continued to sell ebooks at a loss either. The publishers had already made it clear that they would not have allowed this situation to continue. They either had to make more money, or stop supplying digital books.
I suppose Apple could have waited for that to happen first, then enter the fray.... just to stop all this nonsense about them causing prices to go up.

 

[Simoleon547]

I don't think what Cue is saying is all there is to the case, from what I remember when this went to court, the actions were in a very grey area of being anti-comptetitive. But from just what Cue says here, there is no "collusion" to "raise e-book prices". Apple agreed to sell e-books at higher prices than competitors and got permission to meet lower prices of competitors.
Sounds simple. Apple wanted the rights to sell books from these publishers and the publishers said "we're not interested in selling our books at competitive prices with Amazon because Amazon is dumping our books to get people to buy the Kindle." They wanted to sell THEIR books at a price THEY wanted. They have that right. If you don't like it, buy another book. They basically told Apple, "you sell these books at our prices or we won't give you rights to sell them." The stipulation required for this to be legal is that the publishers must only require that THEY get a certain amount. If publishers were requiring Apple to stick to a certain profit margin in addition to the cost of goods sold (not including Apple's added costs), it would be the equivalent of publishers being anticompetitive by eliminating competition between e-book distributors. Still, it would need to be proven that the same profit margins were built into contracts with other distributors.

 

[thekeyring]

Don't forget iCloud. Still blows my mind though that Google now has two streaming music services and we still have no direction on what Apple is planning to do with the Beats acquisition or iTunes in general.

iTunes in the cloud. iTunes Match. iTunes radio. Beats music. Apple have four. They're working on music services but, as usual, are keeping quiet about works in progress.

Like the Watch, silence doesn't mean they're not doing anything.

 

[gavroche]

It is not the case



It is not the case



It is not the case




Are you saying that publishers don't sell ebooks? Well, it is their prerogative

Wow. I guess no point in having a conversation if you deny basic underlying facts that noone involved in the whole situation disputes. Pointless. Have a great rest of the day!

 

[teslo]

do people even read books though anymore

...for the love of all that is good pick one up. today.

that's all we need: more people obsessed with the competition between tech companies who not only don't read books, but assume no one does....

gawd help us.

 

[macduke]

Amazon was ruining the whole industry. Apple was trying to save it. Amazon has been fixing prices for years. I have no idea how Amazon gets away with it.

When asked how he looks back on the "nightmare", Cue plainly stated, "If I had it to do all over again, I'd do it again. I'd just take better notes."

The above quote is why I love Apple. Cue's quote sounds very much like something Steve Jobs would say.

 

[Oletros]

They did not kill competition.

Yes, they killed competition fixing the prices in all the stores

Unless you honestly think that having only Amazon selling ebooks was *more* competition.

Amazon was not the only one selling ebooks. In fact, before Apple releasing the iPad, Amazon share shrinked because of B&N and was less than 80%

And you cannot hide behind the fact that Amazon was selling many at a loss in order to gain market share to justify this fact.

Amazon was selling SOME ebooks at a loss but the whole division was profitable

That was not a sustainable situation.

Yes, it was because it was profitable

Do you honestly think that they would have continued doing that? Really?

Why not?

They either had to make more money, or stop supplying digital books.

Publisher were getting the full price of the ebooks Amazon sold

Do you really know anything about the case? You don't have any fact right

----------

Wow. I guess no point in having a conversation if you deny basic underlying facts that noone involved in the whole situation disputes.

The only one denying that is you, I don't know in which world you live

----------

Amazon has been fixing prices for years.

Really? I didn't knew that Amazon set B&N, Google Play or Sony store ebook prices. Do you have a source for that?

 

[theheadguy]

...And there is Apple, trying to break the monopoly...

You deserve a gold star, Eddy.

 

[AdonisSMU]

How much of the cheap pricing on ebooks was to draw people in? How much of the price increase just the natural progression of having more formats to support in addition to physical books?

 

[ka-spot]

just release the watch !

 

[Simoleon547]

You deserve a gold star, Eddy.

No. A scratch-and-sniff sticker.

 

[MasterRyu2011]

just release the watch !

I know right..

 

[Sofabutt]

Does anyone believe this BS?

Apple throws its weight around at every turn and underhanded practices are something it's accustomed to...

 

[Deelron]

I remember them inundating the market with 20%-30% off any item coupons for a very long time. Amazon lost a lot of money for years before making a dime. They were okay with this, because it helped them become a household name. They do not do this any more.

That is patently false. Amazon continues to do so every time they enter a new market and they still make nothing compared to revenue.

http://www.ibtimes.com/amazon-nearl...t-make-money-investors-dont-seem-care-1513368

 

[Rogifan]

iTunes in the cloud. iTunes Match. iTunes radio. Beats music. Apple have four. They're working on music services but, as usual, are keeping quiet about works in progress.

Like the Watch, silence doesn't mean they're not doing anything.

Yeah but are any of them that good? I've never had much luck with iTunes Match and the current music app on iOS is garbage. I wouldn't call iTunes radio a subscription service like Spotify is. Apple's late to that party. And if Beats is so good why are it's subscription numbers so low?

 

[oliversl]

Good luck with that, the truth does not always prevail in the court room.

 

[rageofreason]

Doubt you 'get' Apple products if you see their products as 'pompous'. This sounds like the view of an observer, not an owner.

You're right - I must be imagining my Macbook, Apple TV, iPad and iPhone. Funny how the transactions for them show up on my credit card statements!

'Getting' a product sounds like someone without any critical faculty. I own them because I like them - at the same time I think Apple has become a company full of itself; marketing itself to pomposity. I'm more open to non Apple products than at any time in the last 10 years.

Apple is now in the jewellery business. 'Think Different' is well and truly dead - look at Apple Pay; they had the opportunity to do something amazing and all they did was get into bed with the credit card companies to perpetuate their stranglehold on payments. Petty innovation - where are the big ideas? Not at Apple.

 

[Rogifan]

Apple is now in the jewellery business. 'Think Different' is well and truly dead - look at Apple Pay; they had the opportunity to do something amazing and all they did was get into bed with the credit card companies to perpetuate their stranglehold on payments. Petty innovation - where are the big ideas? Not at Apple.

Because, surprise, surprise, people like their credit cards.

 

[Jim]

Open Shirt Eddie

Whenever he has presented at the Keynotes or anything in public, my first reaction is "used-car salesman". Love Apple products for decades now and he is the first Apple representative that I wouldn't want to give one dime to. Sorry Eddie, just the way I react to your presentations.

 

[thekeyring]

Yeah but are any of them that good? I've never had much luck with iTunes Match and the current music app on iOS is garbage. I wouldn't call iTunes radio a subscription service like Spotify is. Apple's late to that party. And if Beats is so good why are it's subscription numbers so low?

Well, I agree - the services aren't very good. But Apple seems to be developing them which is quite exciting. Wait until the inevitable music event next year where they show off whatever Beats Music becomes.

Also, what is wrong with the music app on iOS? Genuinely interested as I use it daily and don't have any problems with it.

 

[gavroche]

That is patently false. Amazon continues to do so every time they enter a new market and they still make nothing compared to revenue.

Image

http://www.ibtimes.com/amazon-nearl...t-make-money-investors-dont-seem-care-1513368

How come you tell my my statement is patently false... and then show a graph that supports exactly what i said. They did not make money for the first part of their existence. They now do. I never said they made a lot. Just that they were willing to lose money to gain market share. Do people love to disagree so much that they do not even realize they are agreeing.

 

[gnasher729]

While ebook prices are still too high, at least Amazon is trying to help consumers by lowering them.

I'm sorry, but if you think that Amazon is trying to help consumers....

 

[Stephen123]

Irrelevant for the case, the average price of a digital book from the accused publishers went up rather dramatically

This is true in once sense and not in another. The average price per unit of digital books from those publishers went up. The average price per title went down. Another way to say it is that the price of digital bestsellers went up and the price of the rest of the catalog went down.

 

[trip1ex]

Apple was trying to break Amazon's hold on the ebook market by agreeing to ebook price increases in exchange for a favored nations clause.

Thanks Eddy!

the pricing is all wrong in the ebook market. Prices should be dramatically lower so users buy a bunch of stuff they don't care about just in case they get the time given that these books take up no physical space and you can't give them away nor resell them nor donate them etc.