Discussion

By chgowriter on May 21, 2008

No one's compelling anyone to use Amazon.com, though, and there are thousands of other book sellers, on- and off-line.

By Slava Apel on May 21, 2008

Very interesting how it is going to play out. Amazon's move not only stalls POD publishers, but also ability of POD equipment manufacturers from selling their equipment to those who want to enter the onDemand field in hopes of selling through Amazon.

By Steve on May 21, 2008

Amazon's legal department had to see this coming. Amazon probably has a right to require the sourcing of what they sell to have be done by them. But some folks may decided to go elsewhere.

When will Amazon also require that all hardcopy be generated in their capture entities?

I think they are setting themselves up for a whack in the bottom line.

That just won't fly. They may have bitten the hand that feeds them.

By Peyton on May 21, 2008

I know this complaint to be justified, but if that will make any difference in court is another matter.

My book sold 5000 copies on Amazon awhile back, that seemed to be their magic number too. Once my self-published book sold 5000, Amazon pulled it from their website.

I had the book printed by Morris publishing with my own ISBN number. Amazon said my fulfillment rate was bad, but in reality it was better than the US Post Office has for first class mail delivery.

There email pulling my book off Amazon said, “do not reply as this decision is final”

The in a month or so later I got swell offer from Amazon, because my books was selling so well they would offer me both their printing and fulfillment services to me!

I was expecting something like this too, as I knew the reason they gave was not true for dropping my book. Since Amazon is the only game in town I agreed to their lopsided deal.

Then Presto, my book reappears on Amazon with all 28 reader reviews etc, book discussion forum reactivated (almost anyway) just like before!

It was obvious they dropped my book to force me to go with their in house POD printing.

That POD in house printer used to be Book Surge too.

Book Surge has a bad reputation in the industry for late and delayed production and non-communication with their customers as well as periodic poor quality printing too.

That is why they were going belly up when Amazon bought them out.

Peyton
[email protected]

By Michael Jahn on May 21, 2008

Okay, so here is my perspective. Amazon happens to sell book, but unlike Borders, they have a different distribution model that eliminates the need to warehouse books - they just print them after the order is processed and the buyers the credit card is nicked. This efficient system DEMANDS that they can have the book in the proper condition and all the automated systems be set so this can be done 'lights out'. They can (and will) prove this in court. You want to distribute through them well, just like Walmart insists on EDI, and Time Warner requires ads be in PDF/X and submitted through Vio, hey, you want to play in their sandbox you need to follow their rules.

Michael Jahn
Jahn & Associates
PDF Color Conversion Specialist
1824 North Garvin Avenue
Simi Valley
California 93065
Office: (805) 527 8130
Cell: (805) 217 6741
Email: [email protected]
Skype: michaelejahn

By Mary A. Redmond on May 21, 2008

All of this reminds me of the unholy Adobe- FedEx/Kinko's alliance of June 2007. It took strong management from PIA/GATF, NAPL/PIA as well as other industry leaders getting vocal to help Adobe/FedExKinko's see the error of their ways. The resolution maintained an environment in which fair competition thrives and the graphics arts industry prospers.

By William Butler on May 22, 2008

All of those arguing that Amazon has a "right" to require this or require that need to understand that it is contrary to reasonable practice to change the contract model after the fact.

Were it that Amazon required publishers to print through BookSurge on new titles, publishers can then weigh their options and decide whether to bend to Amazon's will or leave Amazon standing in the cold by itself. However, for Amazon to make the demand for titles listed prior to Amazon losing its mind, is very much less than reasonable.

For the poster who stated Amazon is within their rights to take these actions, it remains to be seen. When a business takes an action that tramples the rights of others and runs contrary to existing law, then that business' action is no longer a right.

Frankly, I hope the court slaps Amazon in the dirt... and slaps them hard enough that they have to close up shop. I've never cared for bullies... whether people or businesses.

By Brian on May 23, 2008

Amazon's only argument against this action is to prove that another POD vendor could not adequately fulfill their distribution needs and that lack of fulfillment unfairly burdens them.

Amazon has done business with hundreds of POD vendors until this point; it should be difficult to make this argument.

Peyton, your argument is of particular interest; have you considered generating support for this action (or beginning your own) on behalf of the independent consumers of the publishers?

You have to give Amazon credit for locking up their supply chain, though. In terms of their bottom line, investors should benefit.