 | 16 Apr 08 |
A couple of weeks ago, the Authors Guild released a note regarding Amazon’s desire to restrict any POD titles except their own to flow through their distribution system. Below is part of the Guild’s note:
“Last week Amazon announced that it would be requiring that all books
that it sells that are produced through on-demand means be printed by
BookSurge, their in-house on-demand printer/publisher. Amazon pitched
this as a customer service matter, a means for more speedily
delivering print-on-demand books and allowing for the bundling of
shipments with other items purchased at the same time from Amazon. It
also put a bit of an environmental spin on the move — claiming less
transportation fuel is used (this is unlikely, but that’s another
story) when all items are shipped directly from Amazon.
We, and many others, think something else is afoot. Ingram
Industries’ Lightning Source is currently the dominant printer for on-
demand titles, and they appear to be quite efficient at their task.
They ship on-demand titles shortly after they are ordered through
Amazon directly to the customer. It’s a nice business for Ingram,
since they get a percentage of the sales and a printing fee for every
on-demand book they ship. Amazon would be foolish not to covet that
business.
What’s the rub? Once Amazon owns the supply chain, it has effective
control of much of the “long tail” of publishing — the enormous
number of titles that sell in low volumes but which, in aggregate,
make a lot of money for the aggregator. Since Amazon has a firm grip
on the retailing of these books (it’s uneconomic for physical book
stores to stock many of these titles), owning the supply chain would
allow it to easily increase its profit margins on these books: it need
only insist on buying at a deeper discount — or it can choose to
charge more for its printing of the books — to increase its profits.
Most publishers could do little but grumble and comply.
We suspect this maneuver by Amazon is far more about profit margin
than it is about customer service or fossil fuels. The potential big
losers (other than Ingram) if Amazon does impose greater discounts on
the industry, are authors — since many are paid for on-demand sales
based on the publisher’s gross revenues — and publishers. We’re reviewing the antitrust and other legal implications of Amazon’s bold move.”
What’s your take on this matter?
© 2008 – 2009, Deborah LeBlanc. All rights reserved.
Deborah LeBlanc is an award-winning author and business owner from Lafayette, Louisiana. She's also a licensed death scene investigator and an active member of two national paranormal investigation teams.
She is the president of the Horror Writers Association, president of the Writers' Guild of Acadiana, president of Mystery Writers of America's Southwest Chapter, and an active member of Sisters in Crime, Novelists Inc, and International Thriller Writers Inc. In 2004, she created the LeBlanc Literacy Challenge, an annual national campaign designed to encourage more people to read, and founded Literacy Inc. a non-profit organization dedicated to fighting illiteracy in America’s teens. She also takes her passion for literacy and a powerful ability to motivate to high schools around the country.
Subscribe to Posts 
Smacks of power play to me.
by Amy Addison April 16th, 2008 at 8:22 amAmazon, Bill Gates, Pepsi… They are all in a bid to take over the world! I went to Denver last weekend, and everywhere we went they had ONLY Pepsi products. They offer big discounts to vendors who only sell their products. They also go to schools and make donations as long as they ONLY sell Pepsi. Amazon is no different. They are trying to corner to the market on POD books. It’s not a lovely thought, but it IS business. It’s not a conspiracy. What they are doing is blatantly obvious. And that’s just my take.
by Natalie April 16th, 2008 at 11:33 amWe can stick together and stop this.
by Terry Finley April 16th, 2008 at 12:52 pmI’ve been gone all day and probably won’t make sense. But I’m of two minds about this. It does seem heavy handed and you make great points. On the other hand, Amazon has the right to choose how they want to conduct their business. Just like Wal Mart has the right to choose to sell the books it wants to.
Customers can protest and ask for the books they believe they are missing out on. Amazon will respond to that, I imagine.
by Jen April 16th, 2008 at 2:22 pmDoes to me, too, Amy.
Argg, Nat, I hear ya! I hate going into a restaurant and asking for a Coke only to be told, “We don’t carry Coke, is Pepsi okay?” My answer is usually an emphatic, “NO!” Geez, if I would have wanted Pepsi, I would have ASKED for a Pepsi!
Jen, I think you hit on the biggest problem of all. Getting customers to voice their protests en masse would make a huge impact I think. Getting them to actually do it is another story. It’s like the current fuel prices. Oil hits an all time high at $113 a barrel…and there’s not a damn reason for the increase! I know because I work with fuel on a daily basis, have to track trucks, barges, and pipeline shipments. There’s plenty damn fuel to go around. We’re just dealing with greedy oil companies and a government who refuses to step in and stop the madness. GRRRR
by Deborah April 16th, 2008 at 2:32 pm