Is it terrible that I couldn’t give a rat’s arse about Amazon’s POD plans?
I’m sure I’d feel differently as an author or a publisher, but I’m neither, and I honestly couldn’t give a toss.
I for one wont be boycotting them. The fact is, their books are usually about £2 ($4) cheaper than most bricks and mortar stores, plus I never feel shafted by them, like I do whenever I buy from the likes of Borders or Waterstones.
So, yeah, I’m still lovin’ my Amazon like a fat kid loves cake.
Scott
April 7
11:23 am
I hadn’t even heard of this. What the hell is POD?
But I am with you. I bought into the two-day shipping they have on the US site. I split it with my brother-in-law. So we both pay $40 up front, and ship anything and everything for no cost the rest of the year. It pays for itself at Christmas alone. But even if you were paying for shipping, on most hardcovers you are still saving about $5 a book over brick and mortar stores. In today’s tough economy, I look out for myself. No offense to the writers out there (whatever POD is).
Karen Scott
April 7
12:09 pm
Lol, Print on Demand. Rather than printing huge batches and hoping they sell, they use the POD system to print on request.
Amazon are basically telling publishers that they have to go through their POD Booksurge subsidiary to print their POD titles, in order to sell directly on the Amazon site, rather than having the choice to go where they want to get their books printed, as they have previously been allowed to do.
Makes perfect business sense to me, but I believe I’m in the minority.
Shiloh Walker
April 7
1:03 pm
No, it’s not terrible but the bottom line is that if Amazon gets away with it, sooner or later it could start to affect readers too.
They are trying to get a monopoly going, although the backlash from the publishing community over this had them backstepping a little without admitting to backstep.
The thing with monopolies, in the end, they are bad for everyone. The main people, admittedly, that this could hurt right now are small press publishers and their authors, but there’s a trickle-down affect.
AztecLady
April 7
2:16 pm
I’m very divided on this one myself.
As a customer, it makes sense to use amazon because of their prices–and free shipping on orders over $25? I’m soooo there.
In the long run, though, I am uneasy about this–the same way I’m uneasy about Walmart’s virtual monopoly. Once there’s no competition, or too little of it to threatened their bottom line, what’s to motivate them to provide good service and good prices?
Dorothy Mantooth
April 7
2:24 pm
Nope, I’m an author and I don’t care either.
Besides, while Amazon is encouraging companies to use Booksurge, they’re not actually making anyone do it–if you use another printer, they simply ask that you give them five copies of each title to keep in stock. Which makes perfect sense both for them and for their customers–Amazon doesn’t want to have to bother returning money taken for titles that never ship, and customers don’t want to buy titles they don’t know they’ll get. Honestly, I’m only aware at this point of two publishers affected by this, and one of them is a notorious scam company. (The other is questionable.)
Yes, there may be more. But really, while POD is a great model for small presses and saves money, is it that much trouble and expense to print five extra copies for Amazon to keep on hand? If you can’t afford to do even that (and I understand some companies won’t be able to do all titles at once, that’s different from not being able to do ANY), perhaps you’re not a publisher anyone should be going with to begin with.
Shiloh Walker
April 7
2:55 pm
I forgot~ one way this could affect publishers/authors outside of small presses, if I’m remembering right, I’ve heard rumblings that NYC presses may consider using POD to put into print author backlists that are out of print and just print them as they get ordered. Cost-effective way to do it, but considering how many backlist books there are, would it be cost-effective for them to print five of each book?
Not the way I’m looking at it.
POD isn’t just a model for small presses~it has potential to be so much more.
Emmy
April 7
3:58 pm
Of the near 200 books I purchased last year, roughly 95% were e-books. I read more ebooks now that I’ve figured out how to back up my files online so I don’t lose my library every time a puter crashes. The majority of the e-books I get come directly from their respective publishers. I haven’t used Amazon in years. I have been able to get any book I want to read online…including books that aren’t necessarily supposed to be there, lolz.
The last print books I got were the Happy Bunny set, cuz those are frickin *funny*.
“Nobody is perfect. And by ‘nobody’ I mean ‘nobody else’.”
Dorothy Mantooth
April 7
4:16 pm
Never mind.
AztecLady
April 7
4:28 pm
I may be mis reading Emily’s comment as well, but filesharing piracy is both illegal and short sighted. Authors are already having to go back to a day job (there was a long discussion about this at the Smart Bitches a few weeks ago, so anyone interested can find out exactly which authors), because there are people getting copies of their work for nothing. (And not just ebooks, either, though those are the most numerous for obvious reasons)
And whatever the percentage of royalties, 100% of ZERO is still ZERO when the reader pays the author and/or publisher nothing.
Barbara B.
April 7
5:05 pm
Emmy said-
“I read more ebooks now that I’ve figured out how to back up my files online so I don’t lose my library every time a puter crashes.”
Emmy, would you mind explaining how you back up files online?
kirsten saell
April 7
5:14 pm
I find it rather telling that this “option” was only presented a week after the news broke and the uproar began. Direct calls from stakeholders to bigwigs at Amazon at least three days before this announcement was made received ambiguous and evasive replies, and no mention of any options but to switch to Booksurge. That leads me to conclude this talk of “customer service” and the “5 copy” option are nothing more than backpedaling.
I’m not even going to reply to this. It’s too early for me to commit to spending the rest of my day pissed off.
Jennifer McKenzie
April 7
6:01 pm
As one who loves Amazon like a fat kid loves cake AND has been affected by this new state of affairs, I am unable to really take a stand.
My issue is that they began to change the status of books already on the sight that weren’t with BookSurge. If they want to change their policy for listings, I don’t think they should remove buy links and change buy pages on books they have previous agreements for.
If they make a new policy, then any upcoming listings would be affected certainly, but why punish authors listed?
I will add there was little warning this was coming.
And it’s been confusing.
But I still love Amazon too and when I’m looking for something, that’s where I go.
I guess I’m kind of hypocrite. The results of this haven’t been very clear to me at all. Some POD places are affected and some aren’t and who knows what will happen next.
I’m just waiting for it all to shake out.
Shiloh Walker
April 7
6:19 pm
sigh…thunk.
Kayleigh Jamison
April 7
6:50 pm
Unfortunately, it will affect readers in the long run, because Amazon’s POD service, Booksurge, is notorious for it’s poor quality of books. The spine comes unglued, the covers run and fray…
Booksurge has a smaller distribution than Lightning Source, the most popular POD service. Add to that the quality issues, and there’s the reason most small presses won’t use Booksurge.
It bothers me because it affects me. My print books with Tease Publishing are through LSI. I also think that Amazon is being dishonest about its motivations. In the press release, they claim the decision is based on customer service and, in particular, quicker shipping. I’ve ordered many POD books through Amazon, and they always ship within 24 hours. I ordered 15 copies of my own book for a signing and they shipped within 24 hours, too.
Like Jennifer, I’m torn. As a reader/lover of obscure Japanese horror dvds, I love Amazon. I’ve never had a problem with them from a consumer standpoint. As an author, I’m not happy at all.
Capo
April 7
9:52 pm
I hate monopolies, too. But you got to admit these smaller distributors have been charging prices way out of line for PODs. I feel bad for the publishers affected and especially the authors.
Kayleigh Jamison
April 7
10:17 pm
Actually, Lightning Source is cheaper than Booksurge, and again, with better quality and great distribution. Booksurge costs about 20% more.
Jody W.
April 7
11:19 pm
What Kayleigh said 2x. Booksurge books are lower quality, higher price. I prefer books printed at Lightning Source. If publishers switch over to Booksurge in order to stay Amazon-friendly, their print books may go up in price and the quality will likely go down. And that is bad for consumers as well as authors/publishers.
Rosemary Laurey
April 7
11:51 pm
Does Amazon even have any sort of monopoly? I was told by one of my editors that Amazon represents about 2% of total book sales.
And yes, I use them as they are so convenient (esp, in winter when I’m disinclined to brave the artic blast) but they’re not the only online store. And I’ve often found books a million to be cheaper.
Emmy
April 8
1:02 am
I use an online company called Mozy. For about $50 a year, I can upload an unlimited amount of info to their storage. If my laptop has to be reset, which it did a few months ago, I can simply re-download all the files, including my over 3000 ebooks, and nothing is lost. This is NOT a file sharing service. I purchased the service after my various computers crashed more than once and I lost several hundred dollars worth of books, which I then had to buy again.
Keep in mind that I also said that the majority of the ebooks I read come directly from the publishers of said books. Meaning I dont use Amazon, Bookwise, or any other place to download them.
Dorothy Mantooth
April 8
1:20 am
Yes, Emmy, but you also said:
(To which, btw, I originally replied:
Ha ha! Copyright theft is funny! When people steal copies of my books and I explain to my children that they get to eat peanut butter sandwiches for dinner again because we can’t afford anything more, I laugh and laugh.)
So what we’re wondering is, where are you getting these books that “aren’t supposed” to be online, and who are you paying for them? It’s all well and good to get “the majority” of the books you download legitimately, but that’s like saying “I didn’t steal most of my furniture.”
I’m not accusing you; I’m just pointing out that your comment makes it sound like you are in fact committing a crime by illegally downloading books, and that you may want to clarify that.
KS Augustin
April 8
1:46 am
Mozy is an online memory storage service, for any people wondering. A nice way to implement remote storage if you don’t have your own independent backup system working at home.
This, however, does not negate Dorothy’s question, the answer to which I am also intensely interested in. (Darn, can’t seem to get rid of these dangling participles these days!)
Emmy
April 8
1:55 am
I thought I had already addressed that by saying that the books I don’t get from the publisher, I use other places like Bookwise. Those places charge for books too, but they charge more to get their cut, so it’s cheaper for me to get THE MAJORITY of my books directly from the publisher. I’ve been told that getting books from the publisher means the author gets less money for the book, but I don’t care. Work that out with whoever is selling your books. I have bills to pay too.
I was referring to the last Harry Potter book, which I read online a few weeks before the print copy was available in stores. I’m impatient like that. I made the rare trip to Borders when the rush died down to get the print copy as well.
Personally, this whole ebook file swap thing is a circular argument that will never end, so why bother? People will always download books, authors will always get upset, and nothing will change. Look at the music biz. Its worse over there. Be happy that most people seem to prefer listening to music rather than reading a book. I haven’t seen the ebook version of Napster yet.
I go back to the first line of my first post…I PURCHASED over 200 books last year. With money. I’m not the enemy here.
SHayne
April 8
1:58 am
Is there any reason anybody believes a reader should care about the finances or anything else about an author?
As Karen so eloquently put it, she doesn’t care a rat’s arse about Amazon, POD or what it does to authors or publishers. She wants her few pounds off.
Readers just want to read good stories. And believe it or not, there are those who don’t care if your kids eat peanut butter sandwiches for dinner.
Emmy
April 8
2:05 am
Not nice, Shayne. Hilarious, and almost exactly what I was thinking, but not nice.
SHayne
April 8
2:06 am
Emmy, generally buying an ebook straight from the publisher means the author gets more.
SHayne
April 8
2:08 am
Emmy, I’m both a reader and an author. As a reader, I don’t care about the author who writes the book. I want to be entertained.
As an author, I don’t expect anybody who reads my works to give a damn how much money I make or anything else about me. *shrugs*
It’s called real life.
Emmy
April 8
2:11 am
Well, it does sound a lil irresponsible. If your chosen profession doesn’t allow you to adequately feed and clothe your kids-for whatever reason- you need to get another job.
Shiloh Walker
April 8
2:42 am
I’m going to chime in here and state that it’s MY responsibility to care for my children and if writing ever got to the point that it was doing the job, then I’d go back to nursing before I’d let my kids suffer for it.
HOWEVER…~and Emmy, I read that you weren’t talking about filesharing sites, so this isn’t really aimed at you~ but as filesharing sites have gone up, my sales have dropped. Steadily.
EDITED…and speaking of kids, my youngest just hit the enter key before I finished.
Anyway, as file sharing sites have exploded, my sales have dropped. Especially the month or two following a new release and yes, I strongly believe filesharing sites, at least in part, are responsible.
Eventually, if things don’t improve, or heaven forbid they worsen, I’ll being moving away from ebooks and concentrating on my print career.
I’m not trying to be greedy, please understand that.
However, I write and sell my books with the expectation I’ll get compensated for it.
This IS my paycheck. And if it gets financially not worth it, I’ll stop putting out ebooks and I’m sad to point this out, but my readers are going to miss out on books.
I have to write my books, but I don’t have to sell them. And many of the shorter length stories won’t work in New York, and others there just isn’t a market for it. So they will just go unpubbed.
Shiloh Walker
April 8
2:52 am
Guh… hate trying to read that little box that lets you edit comments.
Dontcha love my English? 😉
That SHOULD say….
Other books, there just isn’t a market for them so they’ll go unpubbed…. THEM, not it.
AztecLady
April 8
3:12 am
We still got it, Shiloh 😉
But that was sort of my point. If it becomes unprofitable for our favorite, but not mega seller, authors to seek publication, what are we readers going to read? (and since I am aware that filesharing is also done to print books, I’m not making the distinction here, even though I know ebooks are usually the huge majority of pirated books)
In that sense, I’m also selfish–I want authors to make a living writing so I have the stuff I like to read.
Shiloh Walker
April 8
3:58 am
lol… but hey, that’s my kind of selfishness. 😉
kirsten saell
April 8
4:06 am
I couldn’t agree more.
For a blog that has taken such issue with NCP’s lack of editing and poor quality, I find the easy dismissal of an author’s right to compensation a tad, um, wacked. We all know what fiction looks like when there’s no profit in it–and I’m not just talking about authors, but publishers, too. Visiting free sites is like searching your kid’s diaper for the diamond earring he swallowed–you have to pick through a lot of shit to find that one gem. Remove all the profit from publishing, and we’re all stuck wading through the slushpile.
Dorothy Mantooth
April 8
11:37 am
I don’t think readers should necessarily care how I’m compensated, but all too often I see the “So-and-so makes enough money anyway” or “It’s not really like stealing” argument, and that is why I use a scenario like that–to try and impress upon people that no, it actually is stealing. Not just my intellectual property, but actual money from me.
It’s not about you caring how I make money. It’s about impressing upon you that you are stealing something. Really, genuinely stealing. Would you go to a friend’s house and walk off with one of their posessions? Would you walk into my house and pocket a candlestick when I wasn’t looking? I would hope not. But stealing books is stealing, just as plainly and unambiguously as in the first two examples. And the readers who don’t care might want to remember that, as Shiloh said, if there stops being money in it a lot of us will stop doing it.
If you steal enough copies of your new favorite author’s first two books, her sales may not be strong enough for her publisher to agree to put out a third, and you never get to find out how the story ends. I assume you care about that, right? About writers you like being dropped because theft has sunk their numbers so low they’re no longer profitable and the publisher cuts their losses?
Why should I care how my waitress feeds her family? Why should I bother giving her a tip, right? Um…maybe because we’re all human and we should at least have a passing care for each other? And that’s why I keep in mind that my waitress lives on tips, and that’s why I don’t do a dine-and-dash and stick her with the bill? Because that’s just wrong?
Nora Roberts
April 8
1:57 pm
I don’t expect readers to care about my finances.
I don’t care about the excuses and justifications of those who choose to steal my work, or the work of others.
A reader is entitled to expect a good book. A writer is entitled to expect the book to be paid for.
Karma
April 8
3:20 pm
Amazon owns Booksurge, true, but don’t forget that Ingrams (probably the one company that has single-handedly put the majority of small presses out of business for decades with their returns policy) owns Lightning Source and have basically ruled the roost all these years, charging companies up the wazoo. Lightning Source, for instance, charges an outrageous yearly fee for EACH TITLE a company has registered with their services, so that alone could put many small presses out of business fast if they aren’t careful. Imagine having 200 or 500 or 800 book titles in print, then getting hit each year for a “renewal fee” of thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars. And why? Because Lightning Source demands it, even though it’s no money out of their pockets to have book files saved on their computers. I’ve never had any problems with Booksurge, and I’ve certainly had no problems with Amazon…and if the Ingrams/Lightning Source companies are ticked off that they can’t get closer to their planned monopoly of the POD industry, then that’s just too darned bad. They’ve been ripping off publishing companies for years.
Karen Scott
April 8
3:20 pm
OK, so who’s this comment aimed at? I’m sure it isn’t aimed at me, seeing as the tangent that this discussion has taken has little to do with the original post.
Dee Tenorio
April 8
4:19 pm
Not that I think renewal fees should be outrageous, but do keep in mind, computer space and files aren’t “free”. If you’re doing thousands of stories for one site…and you’re servicing hundreds of sites, that’s a hell of a lot of storage. Perhaps those renewal fees pay for their storage and the staff and the entire profits for the company annually, that they then use to continue to provide services throughout the year.
Just saying.
As for the Amazon/Booksurge deal being not much to ask, please do remember that the five book option wasn’t offered previous to the freak out of the small presses. And keep in mind that the doubling up of fees from Amazon onto the pubs, and in turn the authors, is going to up prices as well.
Basically, it doesn’t sound like it’s going to be a problem now, but it will be. Right now, it’s a bit like the Nazi’s invading Poland. They invaded and no one did anything because it wasn’t their problem. They even promised in a rational tone they wouldn’t do it again. We all know how that turned out.
Am I going overboard comparing Amazon to Nazis? Perhaps. It’s an extreme comparison. But human nature doesn’t change and the same natural progression exists. Meaning, if Amazon can run their tanks all over the small presses…you really think they’re going to stop there?
Dee
kirsten saell
April 8
4:22 pm
No, it isn’t aimed at you, Karen. It’s aimed at a couple of commentors who one assumes agree that shitty editing is a bad thing, but then don’t seem to draw a correlation between being paid and putting out quality work. Would these people whine and moan when their favorite store, from which they regularly shoplift, closes due to bankruptcy? Probably. (And no, I’m not saying anyone here shoplifts, I’m illustrating a point.)
Sorry, Karen, should have made it clearer it wasn’t you. My editor would have told me to do that. (Of course, she’s paid to tell me things like that.)
Although the tangent (profit in publishing) is pretty wide-reaching and does touch on the original post. You don’t care about Amazon bullying everyone and his uncle to use Booksurge–you might when your favorite book falls apart after only one read…
Anon
April 8
4:31 pm
I invoke Godwin’s Law.
mel
April 8
8:05 pm
Weren’t there rumors that they tried something like this with kindle? I had heard they tried to force NY publishers to only have their books offered up in kindle only or they wouldn’t carry them. I never did see a backup to that claim, but this move with POD makes me wonder.
One thing to remember is a monopoly of any kind isn’t good. The price of books will escalate if they are allowed to do this. Just like the rumors of B and N wanting to buy out Borders disturb me, this does too. We need competion for the consumer to win out.