Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 11th Apr 2012 11:00 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 513706
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-06
Nah, apple isn't a middle man. It seems they are bad for their role in exploiting these faltering middle men for their own gains.
Amazon seems to have been doing it right: They've been actually going to the source: the writers themselves in order to entirely cut the middle men out. In the end both amazon and the writers come out ahead regarding their takes.
With the apple deal, only apple and the publishers come out ahead. The authors aren't even in the picture.
The fun question is: if amazon "turns bad", do the new market dynamics started by amazon allow these authors to more freely go somewhere else?
The end result we all want is for good written materials by any author to be able to get to readers in the most effective and efficient way possible.
Edited 2012-04-11 21:03 UTC