* Posts by Darren2k10

10 posts • joined 16 Apr 2012

Apple: ebook price fixing? Nooo, nothing to do with us, no siree


I am amazed

The vast majority of the debate above seem to want to know the exact costs of the whole process in order so that they can come to some sort of "acceptable" profit margin value, or perhaps it should all be done altrustically at cost, as anything more is expensive?

Perhaps the reason that books are cheaper than e-books is that they won't sell if they were dearer, and once the paper and ink is used, if there is dead-stock around, it is probably costly to keep, rather than sell.

However, what I find suprising is that this kind of debate doesn't seem to happen in most other high margin industries, such as Fashion. Sure,you have the articles or investigations into people being forced to work in sweatshops and unsafe conditions, but that is morality. When a fashion house sells a dress for £200 that cost them £10 to produce (if that), no-one starts questioning if its really worth that margin, well some do, but not really a vocal majority. They just decide not to buy the item. It should be same with Books, Electronics and so forth. However, it seems nowadays, and often due to companies like Amazon, we have been given a sense of entitlement that makes us forget that without people being able to actually make a living out of making products/books/music, then there will be no new items out there - after all, why would I want to put some of the best years of my life, into something - when I knew at the end of it, I wouldn't make anything from it? Unless of course, there was alternative reasons (charity, etc).


As far as I am aware, (feel free to reference something that proves me wrong), but iTunes isn't based on selling products below their production value, and actually is a healthy and valid revenue stream for artists.


Re: Multi-purpose deal

Your argument that Amazon saved the e-book market, would have some credit if the resulting outcome was the publishers and such, were able to reduce their wholesale prices to Amazon, because they Were making too much profit from the prices. Ultimately however, the opposite situation is caused, whereby no-one but Amazon can buy from the publishers, as the publishers prices are too high to sell at, but the publishers them-selves can't reduce the price or they would go out of business. Its called a false economy, and the fact that Amazon has been using this model now for well over a decade in many different ways to get itself to where it is now (with large investments in the process to stem off their massive losses they made early on), is a rather sore point that no-one seems to want to address.

Apple asked me for my BANK statements, says outraged reader


Re: Additional Verification

And in an ideal world, there would be no fraud, and no-one would attempt to make profit. I agree that the financial institutions need to do more, however, we aren't living in a utopia, and as they have the power, it is as ever the middle-man the UK Small Businesses who foot the bill. So, sure, you can rant and rave if you want, but if it was your cash that was being used to have to pay for someone elses stolen credit-card, you may think that perhaps a little extra checking was worth the hassle.


Additional Verification

iPhones, iPads and iPods are amongst the most favourite items for fraudsters to use. The UK legal system is such that 99% of fraudulent card transactions are never brought to prosecution.

All major banks state that 3d-secure in and of itself doesn't protect someones liability on its own, and it has been proven that there are high volumes of card transactions that pass 3d-secure where their bank do not implement the policy (Capital One, MBNA, to name but a few big names who often omit 3d-secure from their cards) - leaving the liability totally with the business.

After performing basic checks, where there is doubt as to the authenticity of the billing person, identity documents and proof of address are the only methods whereby a company can verify that someone is not using a card fraudulently.

People need to wise up to the dangers businesses face online, and when a company requests such documents, firstly, it is reasonable to contact the company separately to obtain or check the correct email or contact details to send the information to, secondly, to block out any private details that aren't required (lines from your bank statement for instance, but a piece of dark paper over, and scan in the copy), but also then to realise that these requests are unfortunately a part of the world we live in, and until our government get tougher on Card fraud, and stop thinking of it as a victimless crime because the consumer gets compensated from the bank or the business (wherein the business becomes the victim), it will be the only way to ensure that fraudulent phones, computers, and what-not aren't sent everywhere.

Apple fights off ebook suit with anti-Amazon defence


Re: Monopsony, Amazon, Books, Ebooks and Electricals

The main point I was making which has been sadly lost, is not the greed of book publishers to charge £4.99 for a book that is over 10 years old (or £40 for a book that is over 2,000 years old... though this still happens) - the issue is that Amazon had superficially decreased the price of books to the consumers, below their value. Sure, for the massive publishers it makes no difference that they can sell an old book at what someone would consider a high price - however, it is their work to do so with as they wish. You, as a consumer have the choice to not buy the item.

It is the smaller companies, who do not even get involved in the industry, or try to and don't succeed - due to the lack of any perceivable profits, except for the large companies.

This issue applies more now than ever to the Electricals industry, where Amazon has yet again done the same thing, and superficially pushed prices down below their value, creating a false economy for electrical goods - and in so doing kill an entire market for small businesses hoping to start up in the technology sector. This is only bad news for an economy, as why should someone invest their time and risk into an industry when there is nothing to be gained?

Going back to the food analogy here - no food.


Monopsony, Amazon, Books, Ebooks and Electricals

There are very few times when I side with Apple in something, but here I must, albeit I am siding with their effect on Amazon, rather than their own intent to secure yet another win-win for their untouchable fondleslaboratories.

Every single person who has read these articles/stories and thinks "it's good that amazon is driving our prices down for us"... makes me want to ask them if they are naive, or just plain stupid.

Let's change the subject from Books to Food. Everyone wants the best food prices.. so say if we were able to force our local farmers to produce goods and sell them to us at half of their actual cost, we would be so so happy that the price has "finally come down to the right place"... er- that is until the farmer quits as he cannot afford to make a loss, and all of a sudden there is no food to go around.

Quite where this expectation of false pricing comes from is beyond me, Amazon definately have a large hand in it, and every program from "Don't get done get dom" to the local tabloids push the idea that consumers are being screwed left right and centre by businesses who are living it up. True, the government gets screwed left right and centre by the big corps, capita et al, for massive investments that never see the light of day - but the vast majority of companies that keep the country afloat, are barely making ends meet, and yet customers still don't realise that they are essentially spoilt brats, in an environment that can no longer tolerate such actions.

It is the consumers, that need to take responsibility, and stop asking for "lower lower", or one day, quite soon - there will be no one to ask to lower the prices.

Apart from maybe Amazon, and when they're the only business in town - they're not exactly going to agree. Let's see in that situation how amenable their A-Z Guarantee becomes.

ISPs should get 'up to' full fee for 'up to' broadband



The main complain doesn't hold water, as it isn't consistent with other similar areas. Take Sky for example, whether or not you get the full list of channels, they don't give you any discounts.

When you move to an area, and into a property, it is your responsibility to accept what comes with this location. The network infrastructure that OpenReach has put in place was subsidised equally.

The main issue is probably how all ISPs can offer one speed of up to X, yet BT can usually offer a higher speed of up to X, or at least closer to X, and how Openreach dates for BT are generally faster than with a competing ISP.. so much for Openreach being "open".

Browsium rescues HMRC from IE6 – and multimillion-pound bill


Cost savings?

I can't help but think that £1.3m for a web plugin that essentially puts IE6 back on a PC, and effectively very little else, is still well over budget for any government that still does not support SMEs in any meaningful way. As for £35m.... it would be laughable if it wasn't for the fact that they will continue to fork out this ludicrous amount for often late, and mostly substandard work.

Capita job cuts, offshoring 'driven by expectations', says MD


Sooner or later...

I guess you can only make money doing nothing for so long... even from the UK government.


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021