Amazon "capitulates"

[scarlettina]

The Washington Post has it that Amazon has given in on the Macmillan situation. Here's the full text of Amazon's concession and, my goodness, a pissier, whinier, more passive aggressive document has not been seen in years:

------------------------------------
Dear Customers:

Macmillan, one of the "big six" publishers, has clearly communicated to us that, regardless of our viewpoint, they are committed to switching to an agency model and charging $12.99 to $14.99 for e-book versions of bestsellers and most hardcover releases. We have expressed our strong disagreement and the seriousness of our disagreement by temporarily ceasing the sale of all Macmillan titles. We want you to know that ultimately, however, we will have to capitulate and accept Macmillan's terms because Macmillan has a monopoly over their own titles, and we will want to offer them to you even at prices we believe are needlessly high for e-books. Amazon customers will at that point decide for themselves whether they believe it's reasonable to pay $14.99 for a bestselling e-book. We don't believe that all of the major publishers will take the same route as Macmillan. And we know for sure that many independent presses and self-published authors will see this as an opportunity to provide attractively priced e-books as an alternative. Kindle is a business for Amazon, and it is also a mission. We never expected it to be easy!

Thank you for being a customer.
------------------------------------

I'm impressed at the attempts here to manipulate buyers into thinking that poor widdle Amazon has been abused by that Big Bad Publisher! We'll struggle along--this publishing business is a jungle! Our loyal customers will show 'em who's boss, though! Just you wait and see!

The truth is that Jeff Bezos had a hissy fit and Macmillan decided not to indulge a child's tantrum. Bezos will be pouting for quite while yet I suspect.

ETA: Scalzi wraps it up nicely for us.

Comments

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

...they should be able to (1) sell items at whatever price they feel is profitable for them,

But they're selling Kindle e-books as a loss leader because what they really want to sell is Kindle. It's on the record.

When I made my first post about this, I made a point of saying that I don't usually get involved in these discussions and that I was going to sit back and watch it unfold. I'm going to do that now for a number of reasons, not the least of which is, I like you, Sean, and I'm getting hot under the collar with you about something that's irrelevant to whatever social interaction we have had or may have in the future. If you want to continue discussing this here with others, feel free, but I'm disengaging now. I value pleasant future social interaction far more than I do an argument about the book business.

[seankreynolds.livejournal.com]

Silly, getting hot under the collar in an argument with friends is what makes life INTERESTING. I disagree with most of my friends on one thing or another (let's start with vegetarianism), that doesn't mean I don't love them. I mean, what's the point of debating with people who agree with you? I want to debate with my brilliant friends who disagree with me--they're the only ones with a chance to prove me wrong. ;)