Amazon Apparently Decided Their Public Image Was Too Good
Apparently, Amazon decided that their public image was too good. From the looks of it, they decided to try something that would generally (as I’ve seen things so far) make them look completely foolish. Take that too good public image down a peg or two. I am, of course, talking about the Amazon letter.
For those who don’t know, Amazon supposedly sent out emails trying to get people to put pressure on Hachette regarding their dispute. The response that I’ve seen to the letter has been overwhelmingly negative. Even the people who aren’t on Hachette’s side on the dispute seem to view the letter poorly. The best reaction, from a pro Amazon perspective, appears to be the people who merely make fun of the letter.
Regardless, this did not apparently go well for Amazon.
Personally, I find the whole thing funny.
This is the sort of thing that a company can pull off when they have a lot of people feeling good about the company, but that just isn’t Amazon’s situation right now. Their business is doing dandy, but the sentiment out there seems kind of nasty most of the time. Other than to make themselves look worse, I just can’t see why they did it. They had to know it wasn’t going to go the way the letter seemed to hope.
newest »
G. wrote: "It's a bad move on Amazon's part, but I guess they feel they needed to do something to shed a little light on the situation since the Big Publishers have spent so much money attacking them. Why d..."
Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty much against everybody. I don't think big anything is looking out for my interests in particular, but I don't really expect them to.
Everyone is looking out for their own interests, of course. But you have to look at which one is going to get the result you think is best. Selling ebooks for $20 bucks... or selling them for a lot less. In the end, which do you figure is a better money making scheme, because I'd never buy an ebook for more than 10 bucks, and I don't think I'm alone.
G. wrote: "Everyone is looking out for their own interests, of course. But you have to look at which one is going to get the result you think is best. Selling ebooks for $20 bucks... or selling them for a lot..."I generally go for print in any event. The only ebooks I bought were only available that way. I think this dispute is primarily between big businesses and just think Amazon doesn't have enough good PR right now to try this. I don't think Hachette necessarily comes off well in the actual dispute, but people aren't as aware of them and they'd be more likely to pull off a public appeal...even if their position wasn't in the best interests of those people.
David wrote: "G. wrote: "Everyone is looking out for their own interests, of course. But you have to look at which one is going to get the result you think is best. Selling ebooks for $20 bucks... or selling the..."I agree on all counts. And Amazon is spreading their resources so thin at this point that they are scaring a lot of people with their rapid expansion and site errors and decline in perks. They are branching out too fast (talk of phones and television series???).
G. wrote: "David wrote: "G. wrote: "Everyone is looking out for their own interests, of course. But you have to look at which one is going to get the result you think is best. Selling ebooks for $20 bucks... ..."Just wait for the Amazon dollar fast food menu coming soon.
Why does no one seem to acknowledge the Big Five and Apple got caught colluding recently, price fixing? Hachette is operating on a failing business model. Amazon, while making many mistakes, is giving customers what they want. I'm "pro-Amazon" but only insofar as they continue to provide quality service. I'm "anti-Hatchett" but only insofar as they continue to charge way too much money, the lion's share of which does not go to the author. If Amazon suddenly screws the consumer, or Hatchett suddenly decides it no longer wants to operate on an antiquated publishing model that doesn't give a fuck about the reader or the writer, then my position would change.