Apple pulls a switcheroo?

[Desert_Brat]

I had to snicker at this article today in ZDnet, since most of you know Apple had its finger in the pie with the agency model pricing:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apples-luxury-tax-should-spark-a-showdown-with-publishers-but-will-it/...

I was also told tonight that Penguin has pulled all lending rights to their e-books. Anyone else hear this?

[CasperAZ]

I read this article and I can only opine that Apple certainly wants to keep its monopoly in the tablet market.

[ABthree]

@Desert_Brat

Good article -- thanks.

The stubbornly persistent belief that, if we'd all just be nice to Apple long enough, they'll eventually start being nice back, is strangely poignant.  Like people who insist on believing in Santa Claus into adulthood.

Although in this case, it's Vampire Santa Claus, who regularly runs amok and ransacks the community.  Some days it doesn't happen, though, so the believers keep trying to believe.

I don't understand the "switcheroo" part, though:  it's just Apple being Apple.  As always.  Again. 

[ivondale]

They did a lengthy (for the format) piece on this on my local news this morning.  It was pretty anti Apple. I guess there is a slim chance that this new change will get enough negative publicity to make an uproar.

[Doug_Pardee Distinguished Bibliophile]

---

Desert_Brat wrote:

I was also told tonight that Penguin has pulled all lending rights to their e-books. Anyone else hear this?

---

We've been talking about it since the beginning of the year: http://bookclubs.barnesandnoble.com/t5/NOOKbook-Discussion/LendMe-torpedoed-by-Kindle/m-p/789086#M17...

[JohnP51]

I see Apple fanboys wondering why they are fanboys.

[ABthree]

---

JohnP51 wrote:

I see Apple fanboys wondering why they are fanboys.

---

I love that optimism! 

But it assumes a level of introspection to which they've shown themselves stubbornly immune up to now.  After all if watching their beloved gadgetmaker become its famous "1984 Commercial" wasn't enough to shake their faith, a 30% luxury tax won't do it, either.

[RHWright]

Yet another reason why, when it comes time to replace my beloved 1st gen Nano, I won't be seriously considering an Apple product.

I love my iPod. It's a snazzy bit of engineering and interface.

But Apple's treatment of content providers and developers is becoming nothing short of draconian and outrageous.

BTW, anyone have a good recommendations for a non-Apple digital music player?

[JohnP51]

---

RHWright wrote:

Yet another reason why, when it comes time to replace my beloved 1st gen Nano, I won't be seriously considering an Apple product.

I love my iPod. It's a snazzy bit of engineering and interface.

But Apple's treatment of content providers and developers is becoming nothing short of draconian and outrageous.

BTW, anyone have a good recommendations for a non-Apple digital music player?

---

Yep. A smartphone and a subscription to Rhapsody or some other subscription online music provider. Mine works great and as long as you are subscriber to Rhapsody, you can download and play music without connecting to Rhapsody, like on an airplane or elsewhere you can't go wireless.

[JohnP51]

---

ABthree wrote:

---

JohnP51 wrote:

I see Apple fanboys wondering why they are fanboys.

---

I love that optimism! 

But it assumes a level of introspection to which they've shown themselves stubbornly immune up to now.  After all if watching their beloved gadgetmaker become its famous "1984 Commercial" wasn't enough to shake their faith, a 30% luxury tax won't do it, either.

---

Excellent point and one I hadn't considered.

[scott88]

---

CasperAZ wrote:

I read this article and I can only opine that Apple certainly wants to keep its monopoly in the tablet market.

---

Market share does not equal monopoly. If apple had a monopoly then they would be able to stop others from making tablets. Anyone that make a tablet that people like more then the ipad will take market share away from apple.

[JohnP51]

---

scott88 wrote:

---

CasperAZ wrote:

I read this article and I can only opine that Apple certainly wants to keep its monopoly in the tablet market.

---

Market share does not equal monopoly. If apple had a monopoly then they would be able to stop others from making tablets. Anyone that make a tablet that people like more then the ipad will take market share away from apple.

---

Case in point, the Android operating system. You can get an android smartphone from just about anyone. iPhone? AT&T only. Although I hear they are coming out with a Verizon iPhone soon.

[Ya_Ya]

---

JohnP51 wrote:

You can get an android smartphone from just about anyone. iPhone? AT&T only. Although I hear they are coming out with a Verizon iPhone soon. 

---

It's out.  They're not widely available yet, but they're out.  The waiting lists are looooooong, too.

We had been seriously considering iPhones for our upcoming upgrade (and they aren't 100% ruled out) but I think we're going with a Droid X for Mr. Ya_Ya and a Samsung Fascinate for me.  

I hate that they can be so draconian; (most) everything they make is well-designed and I've never encountered an Apple device that didn't "just work."  I grew up on Apple computers and have an 11 year old emac on my desk.  It won't boot since the last move, but I do plan to have it repaired - if for no reason but all of my wedding pictures are on it.  It's very, very difficult to walk away from them because every hardware, software and customer service experience I've ever had with them has been excellent.  But, for the same reason I didn't want a Kindle  I don't want to buy any new Apple products...

[sirwillard]

The article is badly mistaken on several points... enough so that basically the entire article is meaningless.

"He changed the rules of the game and hit them with a new revenue-sharing structure that essentially forces publishers who charge subscriptions outside of the app to either cough up a 30 percent tax on subscriptions purchased from inside the app or do business elsewhere."

Publishers don't have apps, nor do they directly sell books. The changes to the rules (technically I believe the rules didn't change, Apple just decided to enforce them) don't effect the publishers. They effect the non-Apple agencies (B&N, Sony, Kobo, Amazon, et. al.). This is basically forcing everyone off the iPad except for Apple. The publishers will continue to make the exact same amount of money, it's just that all the books on the iPad will be sold by Apple now.

"You see, while publishers may want to cry foul over having to pay such a high premium, they really can’t. Plain and simple, Apple is charging the equivalent of a luxury tax, a premium that a publisher must pay for the privilege of conducting business in Apple’s neighborhood, just as luxury retailers pay a premium for a storefront presence along New York’s Fifth Avenue or Beverly Hills’ Rodeo Drive."

This analysis, once you replace "publishers" with "agents", is flawed. Due to the Agency Model that Apple helped to force on the industry, 30% is how much profit the agent can make on a sale, all of which would then have to be turned over to Apple. Even if you could consider this a "luxury tax" (taxes, luxury or otherwise, generally don't eat 100% of profits), since Apple created the environment in which there is NO WAY for the agent to raise prices to account for the "luxury tax", I'm pretty sure anti-competitive laws would apply (though I'm not a lawyer).

[ABthree]

---

Ya_Ya wrote:
 It's very, very difficult to walk away from them because every hardware, software and customer service experience I've ever had with them has been excellent.  But, for the same reason I didn't want a Kindle  I don't want to buy any new Apple products...

---

Nicely put, Ya_Ya! 

[Desert_Brat]

---

Doug_Pardee wrote:

---

Desert_Brat wrote:

I was also told tonight that Penguin has pulled all lending rights to their e-books. Anyone else hear this?

---

We've been talking about it since the beginning of the year: http://bookclubs.barnesandnoble.com/t5/NOOKbook-Discussion/LendMe-torpedoed-by-Kindle/m-p/789086#M17...

---

That's what I thought, too, since I've followed your thread fairly close.

But the bookseller claimed that Penguin had been "teeter tottering" over complete withdrawal and still had many lendable titles; but they have now fully pulled the plug on lending.

I don't read Penguin titles, so I couldn't fully say one way or the other. But I was pretty certain that I had "read somewhere" that the company had followed suit in the lending extraction.

[JohnP51]

---

Ya_Ya wrote:

---

JohnP51 wrote:

You can get an android smartphone from just about anyone. iPhone? AT&T only. Although I hear they are coming out with a Verizon iPhone soon. 

---

It's out.  They're not widely available yet, but they're out.  The waiting lists are looooooong, too.

We had been seriously considering iPhones for our upcoming upgrade (and they aren't 100% ruled out) but I think we're going with a Droid X for Mr. Ya_Ya and a Samsung Fascinate for me.  

I hate that they can be so draconian; (most) everything they make is well-designed and I've never encountered an Apple device that didn't "just work."  I grew up on Apple computers and have an 11 year old emac on my desk.  It won't boot since the last move, but I do plan to have it repaired - if for no reason but all of my wedding pictures are on it.  It's very, very difficult to walk away from them because every hardware, software and customer service experience I've ever had with them has been excellent.  But, for the same reason I didn't want a Kindle  I don't want to buy any new Apple products...

---

We've had Android phones for about a year now (Samsung Moment) and love them. I've never used an iPhone so I can't compare them directly but everything I see iPhones do on commercials, Android does too.