Even here you don’t seem to understand the idea of variable demand. You also seem to have a strange idea of profit. Just because one product is lowered in price does not mean that another product will increase in price. Certainly it might, but profit is determined by a complex relationship and raising prices will not necessarily raise profit. (Nor will lowering prices necessarily decrease profit.)

I, and many others, from what I have read around different blogs have been quite off-put by the way you have rallied against Amazon. In this case, I perceive that Amazon is trying to force MacMillin to lower their prices. The tactics are hard ball, but so are the tactics by Walmart and others. But I do not see a corresponding attack on them. I also see your and MacMillian’s tactics as being anti-consumer. You, and MacMillian, can raise your prices, but I am not going to pay them. There is no way that you can convince me that an ebook should cost as much or more than a paperback (that is currently out). I could point you to dozens of cases where paperback (and sometimes hardback) prices are lower than ebook prices. That is not justifiable and people will not put up with it.

If you want to look into the future with me, I would suggest that you think about where your publisher will be if, in a few years they continue to insist that ebooks should be as high or higher than paperback. Because not all publishers will make that mistake. You as an author are replaceable. More books were published last year than any year in history. I have lots of choice. You are not so good that I have to buy your book. I am quite willing to pay for books. I buy about 75-100 book a year. But there is no way I am buying books that are priced unreasonably.

This is an entirely inaccurate statement.

First, as I’ve noted, I’ve not nor ever have called for a boycott of Amazon. I’ve called for support for Macmillan authors, by people buying their books at retailers who will sell them to them. It’s cute that you can be blase about the damage being done to authors in this thing; strangely enough, I’m not.

Second, “The Fight for $9.99,” as you put it, could end up being more literal than you think, since if Amazon were to win this particular argument, publishers would very likely feel the need to recoup the lost revenue, and thus all the eBook with price points below $9.99 (which included mine on Kindle, before they were pulled), would likely be hoisted up to that sum. So color me unconvinced an artificially imposed $9.99 price point on ebooks means lower ebook costs overall. That you don’t recognize this possibility is interesting to me.

Third, Amazon has already relented on the point of variable pricing, and did so on the weekend, so its continuing unwillingness to return the “Buy” button to Macmillan books is no longer bargaining leverage on the matter and is simply a punitive act. This is an irrational act, which may be why the market punished Amazon by dropping its stock price $10 on Monday and continuing to keep it well below its Friday close price since then.

Which is to say I have no interest in fighting Amazon — it’s already kicking its own ass with this.

Be that as it may, in the future try to be more accurate with your characterization of my stand: I’m not anti-Amazon. I’m pro-author. And if you want to say I’m for $14.99 ebooks, fine, but you should also note I’m for $4.99 ebooks as well, not to mention $9.99 ones, so long as the latter is not my only price option.

JS

DMCA does not require copyprotection!

Instead of people pointing the finger at Apple and putting a negative spin on the Ipad, put the blame where it really belongs. And that’s on the government and big name corporations that control the government.