If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Evil Apple in trouble again
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:32:35 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Bowser wrote: Irrelevant. Price fixing is against the law. If they broke the law, they get punished and they stop conspiring to fix prices. Apple is just another corporation now, nothing more, nothing less, and needs to be policed like any other huge corporation that will resort to anything to turn a buck. so how is it amazon gets a free ride for selling at a loss to kill off competition? i don't see anyone going after them. Amazon is also irrelevant in this case. This is about Apple and price fixing. Amazon, in choosing to sell at a loss, is not price fixing. What they're doing may be illegal, but that's up to the DoJ to determine, not me. Sometimes it takes a long time to monitor and collect evidence in a case like Amazon's. Also, can you prove that Amazon is dumping to eliminate competition? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Evil Apple in trouble again
In article , Bowser
wrote: Irrelevant. Price fixing is against the law. If they broke the law, they get punished and they stop conspiring to fix prices. Apple is just another corporation now, nothing more, nothing less, and needs to be policed like any other huge corporation that will resort to anything to turn a buck. so how is it amazon gets a free ride for selling at a loss to kill off competition? i don't see anyone going after them. Amazon is also irrelevant in this case. amazon is very relevant. they are the reason this came about. This is about Apple and price fixing. what price did apple fix and how did they fix that price when they weren't at the meetings where the price fixing supposedly took place? Amazon, in choosing to sell at a loss, is not price fixing. they're price dumping. What they're doing may be illegal, but that's up to the DoJ to determine, not me. why aren't they going after them? Sometimes it takes a long time to monitor and collect evidence in a case like Amazon's. Also, can you prove that Amazon is dumping to eliminate competition? it's well known. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Evil Apple in trouble again
On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:15:04 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Bowser wrote: Irrelevant. Price fixing is against the law. If they broke the law, they get punished and they stop conspiring to fix prices. Apple is just another corporation now, nothing more, nothing less, and needs to be policed like any other huge corporation that will resort to anything to turn a buck. so how is it amazon gets a free ride for selling at a loss to kill off competition? i don't see anyone going after them. Amazon is also irrelevant in this case. amazon is very relevant. they are the reason this came about. Only in that they may be price fixing in collusion with Apple. They're dumping tactics, if they actually exist, are irrelevant. This is about Apple and price fixing. what price did apple fix and how did they fix that price when they weren't at the meetings where the price fixing supposedly took place? ebooks, from what I understand. Who cares how they do it? Amazon, in choosing to sell at a loss, is not price fixing. they're price dumping. OK, prove it. What they're doing may be illegal, but that's up to the DoJ to determine, not me. why aren't they going after them? Maybe they need proof. Sometimes it takes a long time to monitor and collect evidence in a case like Amazon's. Also, can you prove that Amazon is dumping to eliminate competition? it's well known. Anecdotal. Provide proof. I dare you to stand before a judge and say something like that. you'll get laughed out of court. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Evil Apple in trouble again
In article , Bowser
wrote: Irrelevant. Price fixing is against the law. If they broke the law, they get punished and they stop conspiring to fix prices. Apple is just another corporation now, nothing more, nothing less, and needs to be policed like any other huge corporation that will resort to anything to turn a buck. so how is it amazon gets a free ride for selling at a loss to kill off competition? i don't see anyone going after them. Amazon is also irrelevant in this case. amazon is very relevant. they are the reason this came about. Only in that they may be price fixing in collusion with Apple. amazon is not colluding with apple to fix anything. the case is against apple and five publishers. They're dumping tactics, if they actually exist, are irrelevant. they're not irrelevant at all. that's what started this whole thing. the complaint mentions amazon nearly 100 times. it's *very* relevant. This is about Apple and price fixing. what price did apple fix and how did they fix that price when they weren't at the meetings where the price fixing supposedly took place? ebooks, from what I understand. i didn't say what *product*, i said what *price*. if someone is to be found guilty of price fixing, shouldn't there be a particular price at which they fixed? Who cares how they do it? how they do it makes a huge difference. the agency model by itself is not illegal. collusion is. you ignored the part about the meetings. apple wasn't at the meetings in new york where this collusion supposedly took place. it's a bit hard to collude when you're not there to collude. however, there are emails to and from apple, so they're not totally uninvolved. the case against the publishers is a lot stronger than apple and not as cut and dry as people think, especially those who have already found apple guilty without trial. Amazon, in choosing to sell at a loss, is not price fixing. they're price dumping. OK, prove it. typical wholesale prices for books are half the cover cost. amazon sold ebooks at $9.99 regardless of the hardcopy price, which means any book whose cover price is over $20 most likely has its ebook being sold at below cost. it's basic math. What they're doing may be illegal, but that's up to the DoJ to determine, not me. why aren't they going after them? Maybe they need proof. maybe it was amazon is who pushed the doj to pursue apple and the five publishers because they saw their monopoly going away. the publishers are a bit worried too because their role is going away, eventually. Sometimes it takes a long time to monitor and collect evidence in a case like Amazon's. Also, can you prove that Amazon is dumping to eliminate competition? it's well known. Anecdotal. Provide proof. I dare you to stand before a judge and say something like that. you'll get laughed out of court. this isn't a courtroom. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Evil Apple in trouble again
In article , tony cooper
wrote: you ignored the part about the meetings. apple wasn't at the meetings in new york where this collusion supposedly took place. it's a bit hard to collude when you're not there to collude. however, there are emails to and from apple, so they're not totally uninvolved. There is no requirement for face-to-face meetings for there to be collusion. It can be done by phone, email, snail mail, or tin cans connected by string. that's true, but according to the actual complaint (which is what matters), the collusion took place at picholene and alto, two restaurants in new york city, with only publishers in attendance. apple wasn't there. it also says there were emails and calls among the various parties, including apple, so apple is not totally off the hook, it's just that apple was not at the meetings where it all supposedly went down. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Evil Apple in trouble again
nospam wrote:
In article , Bowser Amazon, in choosing to sell at a loss, is not price fixing. they're price dumping. OK, prove it. typical wholesale prices for books are half the cover cost. What cover? Soft cover? Hard cover? Limited Edition cover? Bibliothecary cover? Signed First Edition cover? Mass market on bad paper cover? amazon sold ebooks at $9.99 regardless of the hardcopy price, which means any book whose cover price is over $20 most likely has its ebook being sold at below cost. it's basic math. Native fallacy. Baen has long been selling it's own books as ebooks at prices of $4-6, and bundles of now 7 books (each month's output) for now $18. The hardcovers are listed at Amazon at over $15. The softcovers around $10. That has been going on since December 1999 --- 4 books for $10, or one for $4. http://www.baenebooks.com/c-11-1999-...n-bundles.aspx So you're saying a successful publisher (i.e. someone who lives from the books, unlike Amazon) has been able to dump prices for 12 plus years in a row *and* has been able to give away for free a large number of books? How are they paying the bills? Has it ever occured to you that an ebook is a completely different product? Has it ever occured to you that once you have set up a shop system and ebookized a book you're raking in money from every sale, can offer the author a larger share and still make more money per sale than with physical books? Naah, you'd just harp on Amazon and their inflated ebook costs, claiming they're price dumping. Maybe you should open your aperture and increase your exposure time, when you cannot raise your IQ, ah, ISO. -Wolfgang |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Evil Apple in trouble again
"Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message ... nospam wrote: In article , Bowser Amazon, in choosing to sell at a loss, is not price fixing. they're price dumping. OK, prove it. typical wholesale prices for books are half the cover cost. What cover? Soft cover? Hard cover? Limited Edition cover? Bibliothecary cover? Signed First Edition cover? Mass market on bad paper cover? Any cover. what he said was typical wholesale prices for books are half the [price printed on the] cover cost. So a paper back on cheap paper will cost less than a hard-back on cartridge paper, but the wholesale price will be about half the retail price. amazon sold ebooks at $9.99 regardless of the hardcopy price, which means any book whose cover price is over $20 most likely has its ebook being sold at below cost. it's basic math. Absolute nonesense. The other factor is the print run. Short print runs with real books cost a great deal of money, but as the production ramps up the cost of production falls (runs are longer, presses can be bigger etc.) For an ebook, once the book is ready to sell the marginal cost of every copy is effectively NIL. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Evil Apple in trouble again
On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 23:34:13 -0400, nospam
wrote: Anecdotal. Provide proof. I dare you to stand before a judge and say something like that. you'll get laughed out of court. this isn't a courtroom. Which accounts for the total and complete lack of facts presented by you. Not one reference, not one citation, nothing. You could have just made it all up and nobody would every know the difference, unless they cared enough to actually research the case. Luckily for all of us, our courts require facts, not heresay or anectodal evidence. I guess this is typical for an unmoderated internet forum, no? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Evil Apple in trouble again
Wolfgang Weisselberg writes:
nospam wrote: In article , Bowser Amazon, in choosing to sell at a loss, is not price fixing. they're price dumping. OK, prove it. typical wholesale prices for books are half the cover cost. What cover? Soft cover? Hard cover? Limited Edition cover? Bibliothecary cover? Signed First Edition cover? Mass market on bad paper cover? Pretty much all of the above. Bookstores get about a 40% discount generally, though huge chains can demand more. amazon sold ebooks at $9.99 regardless of the hardcopy price, which means any book whose cover price is over $20 most likely has its ebook being sold at below cost. it's basic math. Native fallacy. Obviously the marginal cost of an ebook delivery is very low. There *are* all the editorial costs, though -- acquisition, development, copy-edit. Book design. Covers. Promotion. How to allocate those between hardcover, paperback, ebook, and anything else, is at least somewhat arbitrary. Plus however much makes it to the author. 8-10% of cover price for mass-market paperback, a higher rate on a higher price for hardcover. Dunno what the Baen deals are on ebooks, I haven't been close enough to any Baen authors that they talked about their finances in detail. I believe that at least when it started, direct sales through Webscriptions went 50% to the web site; don't know if that's lasted. Baen has long been selling it's own books as ebooks at prices of $4-6, and bundles of now 7 books (each month's output) for now $18. The hardcovers are listed at Amazon at over $15. The softcovers around $10. That has been going on since December 1999 --- 4 books for $10, or one for $4. http://www.baenebooks.com/c-11-1999-...n-bundles.aspx So you're saying a successful publisher (i.e. someone who lives from the books, unlike Amazon) has been able to dump prices for 12 plus years in a row *and* has been able to give away for free a large number of books? How are they paying the bills? Probably not *solely* on the savings on not having New York City offices :-). Has it ever occured to you that an ebook is a completely different product? Has it ever occured to you that once you have set up a shop system and ebookized a book you're raking in money from every sale, can offer the author a larger share and still make more money per sale than with physical books? Electronic vs. physical delivery is certainly a MAJOR changeover. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Evil Apple in trouble again
In article , Bowser
wrote: Anecdotal. Provide proof. I dare you to stand before a judge and say something like that. you'll get laughed out of court. this isn't a courtroom. Which accounts for the total and complete lack of facts presented by you. Not one reference, not one citation, nothing. i gave a couple of citations and you haven't proven anything i've said is wrong. works both ways. You could have just made it all up and nobody would every know the difference, unless they cared enough to actually research the case. and if they did they'd see what i've found. i *have* researched the case, including reading the court filing, and as i said in another post, it is not as clear cut as some people think it is. meanwhile, most people have already tried and convicted apple and the five publishers, likely by reading opinion pieces from people with agendas. they aren't interested in the facts. Luckily for all of us, our courts require facts, not heresay or anectodal evidence. yes, and they will decide this case based on the facts. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Evil Apple in trouble again | nospam | Digital SLR Cameras | 15 | April 20th 12 01:11 AM |