Comment by thr0waway98121 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by thr0waway98121 | Hacker News Reader

I don't ever post on HN, but this article convinced me to create an account and respond.

>But experts who spoke with me said that the publishing house serves not authors but another master—Amazon Prime.

This is intentionally written in a way that describes Amazon and APub as being nefarious.

I worked in APub for almost 4 years before moving to a different FANG. It was a fantastic place to work. I'm sure engineers in other parts of Amazon get paged all the time. There was essentially no on-call burden for my team. We got to launch some really cool programs and learn about the publishing workflows end to end (ideation all the way to an ebook or physical title). This company was where I became a really strong engineer (my previous job was at a non-tech company building small scale CRUD apps).

First and foremost, authors were our customers. We did anything and everything for authors - it was meant to be a VIP experience.

Does Amazon want to increase Prime subscriptions? Absolutely. But portraying that I or my team "served another master" is disingenuous horse shit.

The article seems pretty well Amazon-friendly to me, generally spinning Amazon Publishing positively and quoting only supporters and one neutral analyst.

Amazon is a monopoly which (a) exerts huge control over the whole culture’s literary output, and (b) has driven / is driving many competitors and suppliers at every stage of the publishing process out of business, using its combination of vertical integration, scale, and ruthless contract negotiation.

I’m not sure “nefarious” is the right word. But it is dangerous having unaccountable private institutions wield such power. Some of Amazon’s business practices seem to me like violations of anti-trust law (disclaimer: I am not a lawyer or legal expert), but the past few decades of Supreme Court precedent have reinterpreted/eroded antitrust laws to the point that there will probably be nothing done about it.

I don’t see what their treatment of engineers making the software has to do with the business model or larger cultural impact. (But if you’re worried about labor relations, how do you feel about Amazon’s mistreatment of warehouse workers?)

Totally agree.

When I read the title my mind ignored the "... of Publishing" because this is just one part of this "hydra".

Amazon seeks to dominate & assimilate as many things as it can like the Borg. It's not too much of a demand by some to break up such companies as it's not good for the people & govt that single private entities have such power.

At a minimum, you're replacing/have replaced a huge number of publishers of various sizes and booksellers of various sizes (including very boutique and personal operations in both cases) with Amazon. OK, that's an overstatement. You have other major publishers especially in specialty areas like textbooks--but as a general rule...

On the one hand, the barriers to actually publishing something are way down. You don't necessarily need to submit your proposal and sample chapter to 100 different publishers. You can just self-publish on Amazon if you're so inclined and do your own marketing.

But discoverability is now significantly in the hands of Amazon's algorithms. And those algorithms are designed with Amazon's interests at heart--such as driving more Prime subscriptions.

A more efficient and data-driven world isn't necessarily worse than schmoozing with New York or London-based editors over lunch. But it certainly tends to concentrate power.

Amazon certainly isn’t a monopoly. You’ll want to provide more evidence to back up these claims.

More of a meta point - there’s generally an anti-FAANG article about everyday on HN, and the underlying editorials are typically these same batch of outlets who directly compete with Facebook, Google, or Amazon directly in ads or video content.

I take the latest pieces on Bezos forcing warehouse workers into slavery with a pinch of salt. You can certainly believe whatever you want, but these absolute claims with no evidence are hard to take seriously.

What did you think was anti-Amazon in this article? That Amazon has its own agenda as a publisher? Of course they do.

>Amazon certainly isn’t a monopoly.

Expensive lawyers spend lots of money arguing about what is and isn't a monopoly. But I think it's hard to argue that, monopoly or not, Amazon is approximately an 8000 pound gorilla in book distribution and, as a consequence, discovery.

For ebooks, Amazon is de facto a monopoly.

Not only can I can buy ebooks from amazon, google play, barnes and noble, and itunes, but I can also upload books/pdfs/files from elsewhere onto each others apps (albeit, sometimes requiring changing the file type). I wouldn't call that a monopoly.

Under US law¹, a monopoly is a firm that holds monopoly power, and monopoly power is "the power to control prices or exclude competition"². I don't think it's a stretch to say that Amazon has the power to control prices in that market.

¹ Under EU antitrust law, the word "monopoly" is not used

² See United States v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.

How is amazon able to control prices or exclude competition? If you don't like their terms, just list your book on one of the other 3 sites and tell your fans to buy it there and if they really want to read it on their kindle, send them a guide on how to upload it to kindle which is very easy to do.

Buying the book somewhere else and uploading to the Kindle is far from being easy for an average reader.

You can read on other devices too - such as android phones, tablets, and iPads. Im willing to go on a limb here and say these devices probably sell more than Kindle. Kindle is not the only device to read this content.

The mental gymnastics you’re going through here to support the Amazon monopoly claim is funny.

"Control prices" doesn't mean for every single product, but for the market as a whole. Most authors don't have a fanbase that sustains their sales alone.

That said, remember that being a monopoly is not illegal. Only abusing it is.

Bork et al (Federalist Society, Cato Institute) believe that consumer prices is the only criteria for determining anti-trust. They utterly exclude anti-competitive behaviors.

How a fare price can be determined without healthy competition is left unanswered.

"Including indie books (published without ISBN), Amazon accounts for 83% of US ebook purchases – and the rest is almost entirely shared between the Apple iBookStore, Barnes & Noble, Kobo US and the GooglePlay Books."

https://publishdrive.com/amazon-ebook-market-share/

Do you support corporations using their superior knowledge and cheaper capital to snuff competition?

That’s a rhetorical question. This isn’t Reddit.

Amazon has been great for authors and for readers. I've read several books by authors that started out by self publishing on Amazon. People like Andy Weir, Hugh Howey, Ernest Cline, John Scalzi, and indeed Robert Dugoni. Of course it doesn't work out for everyone but lowering the barrier of entry to the market for authors is a good thing.

Of course for serious authors, marketing and editing are still essential and there seems to be a notion of successful self published authors quickly getting deals from publishers for exactly that reason. But undeniably the middle men industry is being affected. I'm not even sure that's a bad thing. Marketing and PR is a function that you can pay people to do. Dead tree production and associated logistics is a service as well. Same with editing. There's no need to get all of these things under the same roof.

Yeah. To some degree you've replaced the getting published lottery with the getting people to discover your book lottery (though, even with publishers, that lottery always existed). But I'm not convinced that's necessarily a bad thing because authors arguably have more control over the latter. Amazon certainly isn't the only way people discover new authors.

And, truth be told, a lot of publishers today don't do a huge amount of author service, e.g. marketing/PR/etc. especially if they're not a specialty publisher with a built-in readership and channels.

There is still some prestige associated with being published by a known brand. Although one sometimes wonders how much of that incremental prestige is really warranted.

> I've read several books by authors that started out by self publishing on Amazon. People like Andy Weir, Hugh Howey, Ernest Cline, John Scalzi, and indeed Robert Dugoni.

Scalzi's first novel was Agent to the Stars (1997), which was indeed self-published but via his own website, not Amazon. His breakout novel was Old Man's War (2005) which was published traditionally by Tor.

Right, I did not read everything he wrote. Amazon was barely a thing in 1997.

> Amazon has been great for authors and for readers.

Good for authors/readers of genre fiction, where only the words matter but the presentation doesn’t matter much. Especially good for readers who prefer reading on screen to reading paper books.

I’m not so convinced it’s good for authors/readers of other types of books. For example, the quality of printing and binding of most technical books is in freefall. (Obviously the change is not solely attributable to Amazon. The takeover of many major publishers by finance people who have no pride in their product has a lot to do with the quality decline.)

I don't have a dog in this fight and I don't really have a strong opinion about Amazon either way, but I think it's important to note that your experience as an engineer in the publishing group isn't necessarily indicative of the group's business goals.

It's entirely possible (and, honestly, probable) that the author-focused projects you guys worked on were themselves in service to the larger goal of driving Prime engagement. It doesn't need to be an explicit OKR to be true, and it's also not nefarious: it's just good business.

The article does a horrible job making the case though. It makes the case for prime video, which is exclusive to prime and therefore incentivizes you to be a prime member. Then it tries to connect a Bezos quote about the Golden Globes to an award won by “You Are (Not) Small”. But how is “You Are (Not) Small” driving prime membership? It is only available in paperback and hardcover, so it is not part of prime reading or amazon first reads, which are benefits of amazon prime. Sure, it may be included in a Prime Book Box, but that is squarely an Amazon publishing program that solely deals in books and is just cobranded with prime.

Do you really consider kindle exclusivity a VIP experience? Do you really consider replacing organic discovery with pay to play advertising a VIP experience?

>Do you really consider kindle exclusivity a VIP experience?

What do you mean by Kindle exclusivity? Personally I purchase an ebook or physical book on Amazon just about every month. I read these on my iPad and sometimes on my iPhone if my iPad's battery is dead. I don't own a Kindle device and would never buy one because my 2018 iPad Pro is leaps and bounds better for my use cases vs. anything Amazon offers in the tablet space.

>Do you really consider replacing organic discovery with pay to play advertising a VIP experience?

Citation needed.

Look - if you despise Amazon, that's fine but at least post something with more substance.

Personally, I hate that there's so much Chinese knock off garbage on Amazon, and it's not clear to me which reviews are legit and which ones are fake. I've adjusted my consumer behavior so that most of my purchases end up being books or specific branded items "sold by Amazon" instead of Chinese sellers.

Quite the apposite. Love Amazon and a stock holder. That doesn't mean I'm blind to some of their faults and would like improvements.

> What do you mean by Kindle exclusivity?

I'm talking from authors perspective. To be part of KU you must be exclusive which is anti-competitive.

> Citation needed.

Again, an author thing. Have you noticed that "also bought" have gone away? (https://davidgaughran.com/2018/11/03/amazon-also-boughts-apo...) Authors are forced to advertise using AMS to get their content in front of users when previously discovery was more organic.

Not very VIP.

Did your "learning about" include sitting in meetings with legal during contract planning and C-level strategy meetings for market domination ?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com