Barry Eisler On Amazon [Guardian Article]

*yawn*

What do you expect from an Amazon lapdog?

^

Here's the article in full: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/apr/24/amazon-publishing-establishment-monopoly

I imagine an Amazon lapdog would look like one of Haggis's chihuahuas.

Listen, guys, they just want To Serve Man! Can't you just let them get on with serving us? Here, let me help you on to the spaceship. Hmm, something smells delicious!

Torgo said:

Listen, guys, they just want To Serve Man! Can't you just let them get on with serving us? Here, let me help you on to the spaceship. Hmm, something smells delicious!

Click to expand...

IT'S PEEEEEOPLE!

Gothicangel, please edit your original post so that it fits within the guidelines of fair use. Thank you.

I swear to Zog I saw the first half of this quote:

Old Hack said:

Gothicangel, please edit your original post

Click to expand...

and mentally finished it with "to include the recipe".

To Serve Man, indeed.

When Barry Eisler and people like him claim that Amazon is a benevolent force for good and how dare dirty publishers want to protect their intellectual property, I point to what happened when the big 4 supermarkets decided to get together and drive down suppliers prices on milk and eggs. Yes, it forced the price down for consumers but it did so by taking it out of the supplier's profit margin rather than the supermarket's. This led to many suppliers going under and led to the generation of 'super producers' that could focus on super mass production, which had a detrimental effect on animal welfare.

Now, it's not a like-for-like comparison (monopoly -v- dominant position) and books are not milk. But the point is that the market is not just about low prices for the consumer and if prices are going to be lowered, then you need to look at who is ultimately paying the price for that.

MM

PS - for disclosure, I do use Amazon - mainly for free stuff now as I'm on their review programme. I tend to buy my books from stores.

real existing monopoly run by New York's so-called Big Six.

Click to expand...

I'm thinking someone is not aware of what a monopoly is. Mono in the name is kinda a clue here.

IdiotsRUs said:

I'm thinking someone is not aware of what a monopoly is. Mono in the name is kinda a clue here.

Click to expand...

LMAO. I was literally just about to reply with that when I got to your post.

That said, the sad thing is, Eisler isn't just a writer. He's a lawyer too. He knows exactly what a monopoly is and isn't, and he knows very well the power of words. And I greatly dislike that he has no problem misleading fellow writers with rhetoric that he knows is at the very least, factually inaccurate.

*shrug*

Amazon could use more competition, so someone should step up and give it some.

Getting rid of DRM is a start.

Subscription clubs are another.

Not being "Spamazon" might work too.

Trying to preserve the past isn't going to work. Publishing is finally getting a much needed shake-up, and it can thank Amazon.

ETA: Eisler should have stuck to the word "cartel" to make his point.

I always find it interesting that Eisler, along with Konrath, ignore the existence of small publishers. You know, the *other* white meat.

There are many small publishers out there who put out quality work in poetry, fiction and nonfiction who *aren't* "The Big Six". But to hear these two self-appointed experts there's only NYC and self-pubbing - nothing inbetween.

I've actually asked on Brother Joe's blog and he ignored my questions. It's as if... wait... as if he's just out to promote his *new* publisher, Amazon. Which isn't like the others, doncha know - because it's *AMAZON*.

Sheryl Nantus said:

I always find it interesting that Eisler, along with Konrath, ignore the existence of small publishers. You know, the *other* white meat.

There are many small publishers out there who put out quality work in poetry, fiction and nonfiction who *aren't* "The Big Six". But to hear these two self-appointed experts there's only NYC and self-pubbing - nothing inbetween.

Click to expand...

You know, I was just thinking about that the other day. Interesting, innit?

superluminal said:

*shrug*

Amazon could use more competition, so someone should step up and give it some.

Click to expand...

I agree, and Amazon's percentage of the ebook market has been dropping as other companies do become more competitive. The KDP contract is vague, and I was trying to find the article about the author who put up a few free chapters on nook while his entire book was being offered on Amazon. Amazon dropped the book to free, and it took months to get the price changed. Not surprisingly, Amazon paid the author no back royalties. Basically, what I don't like about Amazon is they act like your publisher, but you're not published with them. They provide you no marketing and little support, but they control how you distribute your book. Amazon allowed e-publishing to become a viable way to write, and I'm not sitting around trying to turn back the clock on technology. I think competition will help the ebook market and be better for the writer in the end.

I like them both as writers. They followed me early in my writing "career", and I was flattered. I bought a couple of their books, commented on them, and got kind responses.

When they began their campaign for self-publishing, I thought, "Great for you guys." I'm happy for their successes, but I can't wrap my head around their disdain for the Big Six. Sure, every industry has its flaws, but we as writers should be able to discern for ourselves what is right for us. Their recent posts sound more like preachy diatribes than objective advice.

Chumplet said:

...but I can't wrap my head around their disdain for the Big Six.

Click to expand...

I'm sure there's a name for this, but it's been (mumble, mumble) years since I took Psych 101. It's that thing about turning your back on that which made you successful in the first place.

Because neither one of them would be having the success with Amazon that they are right now if they hadn't first had careers that established them via the Big 6.

IdiotsRUs said:

I'm thinking someone is not aware of what a monopoly is. Mono in the name is kinda a clue here.

Click to expand...

Can you be a monogamist with six wives too, do you think?

IdiotsRUs said:

I'm thinking someone is not aware of what a monopoly is. Mono in the name is kinda a clue here.

Click to expand...

Fun fact: I followed O'Reilly TOC's #followreader Q&A on Twitter today, and learned that monopolies can be single-firm or multi-firm.

I looked it up, and found this:

Cartels are, essentially, multifirm monopolies. "Multifirm monopolies"— isn't that a contradiction? Most readers know that a monopoly is a firm that is the only supplier of a product that has no close substitutes. Cartels, on the other hand, are made up of at least two, and often several, firms; thus, they cannot be monopolies. Cartels can, however, act as monopolies.

Click to expand...

I immediately thought of this thread.

Disclaimer: this post is only focusing on Eisler's use of the word "monopoly." He's a lawyer, but he probably should have stuck to the word "cartel" to avoid confusion.

IdiotsRUs said:

I'm thinking someone is not aware of what a monopoly is. Mono in the name is kinda a clue here.

Click to expand...

THANK YOU!!!

I swear to fucking God, I just want to slap people. How the hell are six COMPETING companies a monopoly? Even IF they colluded on this model, they're still competitors.

These points have already been mentioned, but I have to repeat them with a giant WORD.

1. The Big 6 ain't a monolopy. Not even close.
2. There's more than the Big 6. There are a LOT of trade publishers in all shapes and sizes.
3. Eisler and Konrath are now being published by a trade publisher. Just because the trade publisher's name is Amazon, doesn't change that they are NO LONGER SELF PUBLISHING. They are participating in the very industry they deride.

I suggest people read Dear Author's Antitrust Primer and its DOJ Lawsuit Update.

There are two basic types of monopolies: single firm and multi firm monopolies. Multi firm monoplies are generally frowned upon because they are viewed as actions of collusions. The Apple + Publisher lawsuit is an alleged multi firm monopoly. Some believe Amazon is a single firm monopoly.

Click to expand...

In the case of the alleged collusion, the companies acted as a monopoly. A multi-firm monopoly.

Like Jane Litte, Barry Eisler is a lawyer, so maybe he used terminology he knew to be correct, but others wouldn't because of the "mono" thing.

superluminal said:

I suggest people read Dear Author's Antitrust Primer and its DOJ Lawsuit Update.

In the case of the alleged collusion, the companies acted as a monopoly. A multi-firm monopoly.

Like Jane Litte, Barry Eisler is a lawyer, so maybe he used terminology he knew to be correct, but others wouldn't because of the "mono" thing.

Click to expand...

Or maybe he uses it because he's a writer and he knows the squelching fear it induces.

The thing is, the Big 6 can't be a monopoly - they don't sell the same thing, and, in fact, directly compete. Konrath made a big deal about the fungibility of books a while ago, apparently not realizing the idea cuts both ways. When all six sell the same Stephen King novel, then maybe they're a monopoly. But a Stephen King novel isn't a Patterson novel isn't a Rowling novel -- so how are they a monopoly exactly?