Sign in with Facebook
Exciting News About Goodreads: We're Joining the Amazon Family!
When Elizabeth and I started Goodreads from my living room seven years ago, we set out to create a better way for people to find and share books they love. It's been a wild ride seeing how the company has grown and watching as more than 16 million readers from across the globe have joined Goodreads and connected over a passion for books.
Today I'm really happy to announce a new milestone for Goodreads: We are joining the Amazon family. We truly could not think of a more perfect partner for Goodreads as we both share a love of books and an appreciation for the authors who write them. We also both love to invent products and services that touch millions of people.
I'm excited about this for three reasons:
1. With the reach and resources of Amazon, Goodreads can introduce more readers to our vibrant community of book lovers and create an even better experience for our members.
2. Our members have been asking us to bring the Goodreads experience to an e-reader for a long time. Now we're looking forward to bringing Goodreads to the most popular e-reader in the world, Kindle, and further reinventing what reading can be.
3. Amazon supports us continuing to grow our vision as an independent entity, under the Goodreads brand and with our unique culture.
It's important to be clear that Goodreads and the awesome team behind it are not going away. Goodreads will continue to be the wonderful community that we all cherish. We plan to continue offering you everything that you love about the site—the ability to track what you read, discover great books, discuss and share them with fellow book lovers, and connect directly with your favorite authors—and your reviews and ratings will remain here on Goodreads. And it's incredibly important to us that we remain a home for all types of readers, no matter if you read on paper, audio, digitally, from scrolls, or even stone tablets.
For all of you Kindle readers, there's obviously an extra bonus in this announcement. You've asked us for a long time to be able to integrate your Kindle and Goodreads experiences. Making that option a reality is one of our top priorities.
Our team gets out of bed every day motivated by the belief that the right book in the right hands can change the world. Now Goodreads can help make that happen in an even bigger and more meaningful way thanks to joining the Amazon family. (And if you want to be part of this, please check out our Jobs page for open positions. We've got a lot of hires to make!)
This is an emotional day for me. Goodreads is more than a company to me – it's something that Elizabeth and I created because we wanted it to exist. Since then it has grown a lot and become a place we love working at, full of incredibly smart and passionate people who also believe in our mission. I feel a little like a college graduate – happy to come to this milestone, nostalgic for the past amazing seven years, and incredibly, incredibly, excited for the future.
Otis
P.S. For the more official version of the announcement, here's the press release that went out today.
P.P.S. Please let us know – what integration with Kindle would you love to see the most?
Today I'm really happy to announce a new milestone for Goodreads: We are joining the Amazon family. We truly could not think of a more perfect partner for Goodreads as we both share a love of books and an appreciation for the authors who write them. We also both love to invent products and services that touch millions of people.
I'm excited about this for three reasons:
1. With the reach and resources of Amazon, Goodreads can introduce more readers to our vibrant community of book lovers and create an even better experience for our members.
2. Our members have been asking us to bring the Goodreads experience to an e-reader for a long time. Now we're looking forward to bringing Goodreads to the most popular e-reader in the world, Kindle, and further reinventing what reading can be.
3. Amazon supports us continuing to grow our vision as an independent entity, under the Goodreads brand and with our unique culture.
It's important to be clear that Goodreads and the awesome team behind it are not going away. Goodreads will continue to be the wonderful community that we all cherish. We plan to continue offering you everything that you love about the site—the ability to track what you read, discover great books, discuss and share them with fellow book lovers, and connect directly with your favorite authors—and your reviews and ratings will remain here on Goodreads. And it's incredibly important to us that we remain a home for all types of readers, no matter if you read on paper, audio, digitally, from scrolls, or even stone tablets.
For all of you Kindle readers, there's obviously an extra bonus in this announcement. You've asked us for a long time to be able to integrate your Kindle and Goodreads experiences. Making that option a reality is one of our top priorities.
Our team gets out of bed every day motivated by the belief that the right book in the right hands can change the world. Now Goodreads can help make that happen in an even bigger and more meaningful way thanks to joining the Amazon family. (And if you want to be part of this, please check out our Jobs page for open positions. We've got a lot of hires to make!)
This is an emotional day for me. Goodreads is more than a company to me – it's something that Elizabeth and I created because we wanted it to exist. Since then it has grown a lot and become a place we love working at, full of incredibly smart and passionate people who also believe in our mission. I feel a little like a college graduate – happy to come to this milestone, nostalgic for the past amazing seven years, and incredibly, incredibly, excited for the future.
Otis
P.S. For the more official version of the announcement, here's the press release that went out today.
P.P.S. Please let us know – what integration with Kindle would you love to see the most?
Comments Showing 951-1,000 of 2,216 (2216 new)
If things change, I will not be terribly happy. I do not read book reviews on Amazon as they are largely skewed or unreliable. As a Kindle user the only benefit I could perceive is discounts, but I have no idea how or why either site would allow that. I'll take this announcement with a grain of salt.
Congratulations! I guess I have another reason to buy a Kindle now.
Amanda wrote: "A lot of these questions about integration and what is actually changing are answered in this interview:http://paidcontent.org/2013/03/28/fir......"
Don't the questions are answered. Otis says things like "certainly probably" and "stay tuned" and "We’re going to think about this in terms of what’s best for our members"
I swear, if this decision ruins Goodreads, I'm going to be crushed. I know that websites are constantly undergoing changes, updates, etc, but I like Goodreads the way it is. It's like my safe-haven. If it all goes to crap I don't know what I'm going to do with myself, honestly.
Will I have to change my account or something? I can't login with the one I'm currently using?
Sarah wrote: "Bird Brian wrote: "Coming soon...You read "The Sound and the Fury"?
People who bought this book also bought
-tent stakes
-hockey pucks
-applesauce
You read "The Velveteen Rabbit"?
People..."
I agree
Catherine wrote: "Feature Request: When I buy a book on Amazon I'd like it to automatically get added to my to read or reading shelf (unless I click a box to not post it, which I would do if it was something like a ..."SIGNED!
All I want is to set an app that can bring out genuine readers among all users.
Bugmenot wrote: "The question you have to ask yourself is how much money you are owed as a librarian. The fact is that you built the asset that is being purchased and yet you are not being compensated for building ..."Interesting concept. The Librarians and users built the structure with all its reviews and accurate data which in turn attracted more users to a product big enough to make "low range eight digit figure"
Maybe there should be compensation to librarians based on time spent working on the site.
Just posted this off to Goodreads. From others' quotes from responses they've received regarding reviews, I don't think I'm going to get anything resembling a clear answer.
Hi,
A large proportion of your membership is shocked and highly concerned at the purchase of Goodreads by Amazon. Many members came to Goodreads because it was independent, and I personally am not happy to have gone overnight from being a member of an independent book-review sharing site to a member of a subsidiary of one of the largest book-sellers on the planet.
I am sure you know all about Amazon's history in purchasing independent book-related organisations and either homogenising them out of existence or destroying them through neglect. It is surprising to everyone, especially in light of the massive Amazon database debacle which members worked day and night to correct as well as they could, that you would even consider joining forces with this organisation.
The general consensus, from my reading of posts on your website (http://www.goodreads.com/blog/show/41... , is that your responding on the Goodread site to the questions being asked would be a very good thing. A significant proportion of Goodreads members are not members of Facebook or Twitter. You have provided this email address on Facebook for people with questions, but have not responded to the thread on your own site. This does not help allay the fears of your members; indeed, it serves to heighten them.
Asking everyone to send private emails puts the onus on us, your loyal and concerned members, to request information you really ought to be providing on your site. It also makes it more difficult for all Goodreads members, who really do WANT to be reassured that everything isn't going to hell in a hand-basket, to know what's going on.
On to specific questions:
These are just some of the major questions being asked, by myself and other members. There are many more, which you will find if you read through people's submissions on your website.
1. Amazon has privacy policies which allow them to "share" their members' personal information with affiliated businesses they do not control, third-party service providers etc. Will Amazon policies now override Goodreads policies? If policies do change, will your members be given advance notice so that they can make an informed decision on whether to remain with Goodreads?
2. Amazon has a policy that people can only post reviews on their website if they have bought something from their website. If reviews on Goodreads and Amazon are synced, which some people are talking about, would that mean that people who have not bought anything from Amazon will no longer be able to post reviews on either site?
3. Amazon has banned authors from reviewing books from their own "genre". Will this policy be extended to Goodreads?
4. Amazon's privacy policy allows them to use/alter etc input provided by site users. Will these policies by imposed upon Goodreads? From their privacy policy: "If you do post content or submit material, and unless we indicate otherwise, you grant Amazon a nonexclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, and fully sublicensable right to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, and display such content throughout the world in any media. You grant Amazon and sublicensees the right to use the name that you submit in connection with such content, if they choose..."
5. Also, Amazon demands that reviews be of a certain length. Would this rule be applied to Goodreads?
For me, a "Yes, those rules will now apply to Goodreads" answer to any one of the first four questions in particular will result in my immediately cancelling my Goodreads account. I do not want my reading habits monitored and/or dictated by a single book-seller.
Hi,
A large proportion of your membership is shocked and highly concerned at the purchase of Goodreads by Amazon. Many members came to Goodreads because it was independent, and I personally am not happy to have gone overnight from being a member of an independent book-review sharing site to a member of a subsidiary of one of the largest book-sellers on the planet.
I am sure you know all about Amazon's history in purchasing independent book-related organisations and either homogenising them out of existence or destroying them through neglect. It is surprising to everyone, especially in light of the massive Amazon database debacle which members worked day and night to correct as well as they could, that you would even consider joining forces with this organisation.
The general consensus, from my reading of posts on your website (http://www.goodreads.com/blog/show/41... , is that your responding on the Goodread site to the questions being asked would be a very good thing. A significant proportion of Goodreads members are not members of Facebook or Twitter. You have provided this email address on Facebook for people with questions, but have not responded to the thread on your own site. This does not help allay the fears of your members; indeed, it serves to heighten them.
Asking everyone to send private emails puts the onus on us, your loyal and concerned members, to request information you really ought to be providing on your site. It also makes it more difficult for all Goodreads members, who really do WANT to be reassured that everything isn't going to hell in a hand-basket, to know what's going on.
On to specific questions:
These are just some of the major questions being asked, by myself and other members. There are many more, which you will find if you read through people's submissions on your website.
1. Amazon has privacy policies which allow them to "share" their members' personal information with affiliated businesses they do not control, third-party service providers etc. Will Amazon policies now override Goodreads policies? If policies do change, will your members be given advance notice so that they can make an informed decision on whether to remain with Goodreads?
2. Amazon has a policy that people can only post reviews on their website if they have bought something from their website. If reviews on Goodreads and Amazon are synced, which some people are talking about, would that mean that people who have not bought anything from Amazon will no longer be able to post reviews on either site?
3. Amazon has banned authors from reviewing books from their own "genre". Will this policy be extended to Goodreads?
4. Amazon's privacy policy allows them to use/alter etc input provided by site users. Will these policies by imposed upon Goodreads? From their privacy policy: "If you do post content or submit material, and unless we indicate otherwise, you grant Amazon a nonexclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, and fully sublicensable right to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, and display such content throughout the world in any media. You grant Amazon and sublicensees the right to use the name that you submit in connection with such content, if they choose..."
5. Also, Amazon demands that reviews be of a certain length. Would this rule be applied to Goodreads?
For me, a "Yes, those rules will now apply to Goodreads" answer to any one of the first four questions in particular will result in my immediately cancelling my Goodreads account. I do not want my reading habits monitored and/or dictated by a single book-seller.
I'm disappointed to hear this. I don't support Amazon's practices and am saddened by this change on GoodReads.
No. I don't like hat at all. It's quite a shock, really.
I don't know how I feel about this...it seems confusing. Will I like Goodreads less?
Vivl wrote: "Just posted this off to Goodreads. From others' quotes from responses they've received regarding reviews, I don't think I'm going to get anything resembling a clear answer.Hi,
A large proportion..."
I totally second your thoughts...
This is so depressing..
This acquisition is in no way exciting... Not happy,people..
Will wrote: "I'm disappointed to hear this. I don't support Amazon's practices and am saddened by this change on GoodReads."Agree 100%.
Joined Goodreads as it was independant and my data would not be used to direct sales at me as Amazon will most likely now do.
From http://paidcontent.org/2013/03/28/fir...
Will Amazon have access to all of the Goodreads users’ data?
OC: “Goodreads is or will be a wholly owned subsidiary of Amazon, so on one level, yes. Are things going to happen in the background without customers understanding it? I think the answer to that is no….We’ll make it very easy for someone to say, ‘Yeah, I’d love it if you could import all of my Amazon or Kindle purchases into my Goodreads shelf.’ We’ll make it very easy for people to do, but they’ll be aware of what’s happening.”
So. Amazon now DOES have access to our user information "on one level"? What level is that, exactly? And you *think* the answer is no to changes being made without members' knowledge? Gor blimey.
Will Amazon have access to all of the Goodreads users’ data?
OC: “Goodreads is or will be a wholly owned subsidiary of Amazon, so on one level, yes. Are things going to happen in the background without customers understanding it? I think the answer to that is no….We’ll make it very easy for someone to say, ‘Yeah, I’d love it if you could import all of my Amazon or Kindle purchases into my Goodreads shelf.’ We’ll make it very easy for people to do, but they’ll be aware of what’s happening.”
So. Amazon now DOES have access to our user information "on one level"? What level is that, exactly? And you *think* the answer is no to changes being made without members' knowledge? Gor blimey.
Jacquie wrote: "for me, I would like to be able to post one review and have it go to both sites." I second that.
Kari wrote: "One thing I do find heartening is how many are upset by this news too. Nice to know other readers value independence as well."We are the 99% :)
Kari wrote: "One thing I do find heartening is how many are upset by this news too. Nice to know other readers value independence as well."It also means the goodreads librarians go from volunteers who are lending a hand to help a community to unpaid workers for a mega-corporation who uses that work for profit.
If you value your privacy and figure that going to an organisation that is only 40% owned by Amazon as distinct from 100%, I'm not sure that the Library Thing is the answer either.It's not easy to set up. The export .csv file from Goodreads contains data that isn't useful. A lot of the books don't have correct ISBN numbers and the major source of looking those up is with Amazon! I still haven't been able to transfer the 650 books from my bookshelves to there.
Not happy, Jan! (Or Otis or Elizabeth or Amazon)
Henri wrote: "Kari wrote: "One thing I do find heartening is how many are upset by this news too. Nice to know other readers value independence as well."It also means the goodreads librarians go from volunteer..."
Yeah! That's unfair, improper and so insensitive!
Every time I reread the "Exciting News . . . Amazon Family!" line I get sick to my stomach. It's so full of it. I once worked for an oil company that was bought by a huge corporation and I'll always remember the CEO's speech to all of us about what great news he had about such a happy merger. Of course people lost jobs like crazy. I just hate these fake "happy" announcements.
Well, i'm happy to hear i wasn't the only one unhappy about this. I don't feel they should be changing it if us (The users of goodreads) do not support it.
Sarah wrote: "Bird Brian wrote: "Coming soon...You read "The Sound and the Fury"?
People who bought this book also bought
-tent stakes
-hockey pucks
-applesauce
You read "The Velveteen Rabbit"?
People..."
Sarah, what page is this quote from? I'd like to comment on this. Thanks.
It also means the goodreads librarians go from volunteers who are lending a hand to help a community to unpaid workers for a mega-corporation who uses that work for profit. This, so much.
I saw a mention of the site riffle.com but I can't go there because it requires Facebook to sign in. Are there any sites left that have not been corrupted by a mega corporation? This is so not "exciting", and the way it is being managed is less than professional. I mean woo hoo to your big announcement but what does it MEAN?
Ugh. WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO US!?!?!? I've been to almost all the sites that are announcing this and I find NOT ONE good thing from it! I think they're going to lose a lot of members this way. What the hell?
Nikki wrote: "*checks date*F***. It's not April Fool's Day. This is real!?"
My thoughts exactly. Ugh.
Let's just hope Amazon doesn't come in and change us....I'm a nook owner & I love GoodReads!!!
This isn't good news to me. I refuse to make available any personal information (such as the contents of my library) to Amazon for free, which I'm assuming is exactly what will happen.
I don't begrudge wanting your payday, but it won't be at the cost of all my private book lists and thoughts. Sorry.
I don't begrudge wanting your payday, but it won't be at the cost of all my private book lists and thoughts. Sorry.
I share all the worries already brought up. Please take our concerns seriously and address them directly.
uhh...okay. I better hope that there won't be any amazon adds and stuff. If so, I would propably leave..
Peter wrote: "Ayman wrote: "Phillip wrote: "Very disturbing news after all the trouble with Amazon last year."What trouble if I may ask?"
A little over a year ago, Amazon forced Goodreads to remove all data s..."
Peter wrote: "Ayman wrote: "Phillip wrote: "Very disturbing news after all the trouble with Amazon last year."
What trouble if I may ask?"
A little over a year ago, Amazon forced Goodreads to remove all data s..."
Thank you for the response ^_^ Now that I understand better.. I'm not really happy about the move!
I was thinking with puppy-eyes and pink rainbows, as I forgot completely that amazon is a 'corporation' :(
I'm going to delete my suggestions and add my voice of frustration of the move and lack of any explanation.
A.B. wrote: "I tried the exporting data and inporting into the Library Thing and it doesn't work too well. Even though I paid up, more than half my books aren't "recognised" and in the same position in the queu..."This was taken from my suggestions, which I took back completely. I didn't know the history between Amazon & Goodreads, it also slipped my mind that amazon is a corporation...
So yeah.. very sad news.
Exciting news!Compliments to all lovers of Goodreads, to Elisabeth and Otis and... AMAZON!
Frank Spada
Apparently Otis did respond to some questions in this thread, six hours ago. I have emailed suggesting he make it a separate blog post so people can actually FIND it amongst the 23 (and counting) pages of comments. I am still concerned about the "fluffiness" of some of the answers. I'd like black and white yes and no answers to questions of privacy in particular, for example whether Amazon's completely dodgy privacy policies in regards to reviews etc (where they can use, share, alter them without limit) will now apply to Goodreads reviews. And I'm seriously thinking that even if the privacy concerns are all sewn up nice and tight and I decide to stay a member of Goodreads I will probably be cancelling my Librarian status. As Henri said, I have gone from being a willing volunteer to an unpaid worker for a multi-billion-dollar corporation.
Otis' post:
"Hey guys,
Apologies for the slow response - as you might imagine it's been a busy day - but you guys are super important, so I spent the last few hours reading this forum. Here are some answers. I have attempted to answer them honestly, and say how I see things.
> Also, they already own shelfari. What does it mean when they want to own both?
> Great its Shelfari all over again.
Shelfari was a totally different story. It was six people, and my understanding is Amazon has used it for the meta-data - they even call it "A community powered encyclopedia for book lovers" - which is very different from what Goodreads is. Goodreads is focused on helping people find books through their friends, through community, and through our recommendation engine. We are currently 40 people, hiring fast, and excited about building a bigger and better service.
> Not The Michael: As a general rule I like Amazon, but unless they take an entirely 100% hands-off attitude toward Goodreads I find it hard to believe this will be in the best interest for the readers. There are simply too many ways they can interfere with the neutral Goodreads experience and/or try to profit from the strictly volunteer efforts of Goodreads users.
I understand why you'd question that. But let me reassure you that I believe it will be very good for readers. Amazon has a long history of letting independently run subsidiaries flourish - just look at Zappos, Audible, IMDB, or Diapers.com.
Let me further reinforce that one of the most important things about Goodreads is that it's a place for readers of all kinds (print, digital, audio, etc), and that is something incredibly important to us, and one that I think would hurt the site to remove. I have no plans to change that, and the guys at Amazon feel the same.
> I'm also concerned as a Nook user. I'm already feeling boxed into a corner because Amazon is trying to dominate the ebook market, and I certainly don't want to be further discriminated against because I don't have (nor ever want) a Kindle.
See above - we value readers of all platforms, and consider that something important to the heart of what Goodreads is, and don't plan to change it.
> I've yet to see a company/site join Amazon and things change for the better.
See my note above about Zappos, IMDB, Audible, Diapers.com, and many more.
> I hope that GR will not censure reviews, delete reviews without notice etc as Amazon does.
Our policies have not changed. Our philosophy is that readers should get the best and most relevant reviews. We actually are excited now to have more resources to focus on improving the order of our reviews (I would hope that one day they can be personalized!).
> I fail to see how it helps Goodreads do what Goodreads does well
I think there are huge opportunities for Goodreads to create social experience on the Kindle. That is huge for Goodreads, and huge for Kindle. We'll also be able to drastically improve our meta-data, and leverage many other resources Amazon has to improve Goodreads.
> Does this mean that the weeks and months of work we put into repairing the catalog last year was for nothing?
I know there are a lot of mixed emotions going around on this board about this. We greatly appreciate all the heartfelt work librarians have done in terms of improving our catalog for the use of the greater community, both in general and revolving around repairing the catalog last year. Does this mean your work was for nothing? No. You helped save lots of other members' data from being destroyed. Even better - Amazon data will be coming back - this is a good thing, as we will get back the KDP data, and a ton of international data.
In fact, we now plan to focus more on improving our catalog with respect to separating international editions, and having better librarian tools to do that. I think Goodreads has one of the best book catalogs around, largely thanks to the community here, and changing that would not be in our best interests.
> Can I ask what this means in terms of ownership of our reviews?
Our policies have not changed. You still have full control of your reviews, just ask you always have.
> I made the choice to not review books on Amazon a long time ago and I will not have that choice taken away from me.
Where you review books is your choice. Your Goodreads reviews are under your control to manage.
> I wouldn't mind some bits of integration between Goodreads and Kindle users along the lines of updating reading progress or viewing Goodreads book pages straight from a Kindle book, etc.
We're looking forward to building that!
> I have to say that this (Amazon's share) has not ruined LibraryThing at all (from my point of view as a user), so we can be optimistic about Goodreads too?
I'm very confident that Goodreads is going to get a lot better. Think about Google buying Youtube, or eBay buying Paypal - I think it's going to be the same kind of thing here.
> Will goodreads be under the same constraints that Amazon has enforced on their site - namely censorship of topics they deem inappropriate reading material?
We will be continuing to make policy decisions based on what we feel is best for the Goodreads community.
> And there will also likely be a "like" and a "don't like" button for both comments and reviews.
I like the idea of a "like" button for comments actually. But a "don't like" would be too negative.
> What does this mean for Goodreads users? I don't hate Amazon but I don't use t for a reason. Goodreads, is my place to find UNBIASED reccomendations for books. I don't want to log into Goodreads and see a billion Amazon ads hacking stuff at me. How will this merg effect Goodreads specifically? Am I expected to log in with my Amazon info? Am I expected to only add "kindle" editions to my "To Be Read" shelf?
I think you'll find that very little changes on Goodreads itself, other than changes and improvements we would have been making anyways. We plan to eventually give members the option to connect their Goodreads and Amazon account, in order to be able to pull your purchase history in and rate/review your books. We also plan to add various integrations on Kindle devices and apps to make it easier for readers to share what they are reading.
> What BunWat said, among others. I am certain Otis and company don't PLAN for any changes -- but once the papers are signed and the power shifts, what they plan and what becomes fact may have no relationship to each other.
All I can say to this, is that Amazon shares the goal we have of growing Goodreads into a larger, more vibrant community. It's the reason they are buying us, and I am personally excited to innovate with them on what the future of reading looks like.
> If they could say we are getting re-reading option, and a-b-c bugs fixed,
Not sure about the priority of re-reading, but we expect this will enable us to focus a lot more on exciting new features for the community, and bug fixes too.
> We're providing you feedback, begging you to provide answers as to what this means. If you're listening, why aren't you answering the questions with actual information rather than platitudes?
We are doing our best, which is all we can do. I remain committed to this website, and this community, and appreciate your patience. We will continue to communicate with you and share updates as we have them.
> Goodreads does not exist independently of its members. You are Goodreads. I am Goodreads. We are Goodreads. We made it the attractive commodity it has become.
I love that you said that, it's exactly how I feel. Goodreads is indeed the sum of the amazing people here. It's something I cherish and treasure, and am honored to be the steward to help it continue to grow. I wake up every day thinking about Goodreads and how to make it better.
As you might imagine, it's been a big day, and the team has been working hard. I'll be online tomorrow to answer more questions."
Otis' post:
"Hey guys,
Apologies for the slow response - as you might imagine it's been a busy day - but you guys are super important, so I spent the last few hours reading this forum. Here are some answers. I have attempted to answer them honestly, and say how I see things.
> Also, they already own shelfari. What does it mean when they want to own both?
> Great its Shelfari all over again.
Shelfari was a totally different story. It was six people, and my understanding is Amazon has used it for the meta-data - they even call it "A community powered encyclopedia for book lovers" - which is very different from what Goodreads is. Goodreads is focused on helping people find books through their friends, through community, and through our recommendation engine. We are currently 40 people, hiring fast, and excited about building a bigger and better service.
> Not The Michael: As a general rule I like Amazon, but unless they take an entirely 100% hands-off attitude toward Goodreads I find it hard to believe this will be in the best interest for the readers. There are simply too many ways they can interfere with the neutral Goodreads experience and/or try to profit from the strictly volunteer efforts of Goodreads users.
I understand why you'd question that. But let me reassure you that I believe it will be very good for readers. Amazon has a long history of letting independently run subsidiaries flourish - just look at Zappos, Audible, IMDB, or Diapers.com.
Let me further reinforce that one of the most important things about Goodreads is that it's a place for readers of all kinds (print, digital, audio, etc), and that is something incredibly important to us, and one that I think would hurt the site to remove. I have no plans to change that, and the guys at Amazon feel the same.
> I'm also concerned as a Nook user. I'm already feeling boxed into a corner because Amazon is trying to dominate the ebook market, and I certainly don't want to be further discriminated against because I don't have (nor ever want) a Kindle.
See above - we value readers of all platforms, and consider that something important to the heart of what Goodreads is, and don't plan to change it.
> I've yet to see a company/site join Amazon and things change for the better.
See my note above about Zappos, IMDB, Audible, Diapers.com, and many more.
> I hope that GR will not censure reviews, delete reviews without notice etc as Amazon does.
Our policies have not changed. Our philosophy is that readers should get the best and most relevant reviews. We actually are excited now to have more resources to focus on improving the order of our reviews (I would hope that one day they can be personalized!).
> I fail to see how it helps Goodreads do what Goodreads does well
I think there are huge opportunities for Goodreads to create social experience on the Kindle. That is huge for Goodreads, and huge for Kindle. We'll also be able to drastically improve our meta-data, and leverage many other resources Amazon has to improve Goodreads.
> Does this mean that the weeks and months of work we put into repairing the catalog last year was for nothing?
I know there are a lot of mixed emotions going around on this board about this. We greatly appreciate all the heartfelt work librarians have done in terms of improving our catalog for the use of the greater community, both in general and revolving around repairing the catalog last year. Does this mean your work was for nothing? No. You helped save lots of other members' data from being destroyed. Even better - Amazon data will be coming back - this is a good thing, as we will get back the KDP data, and a ton of international data.
In fact, we now plan to focus more on improving our catalog with respect to separating international editions, and having better librarian tools to do that. I think Goodreads has one of the best book catalogs around, largely thanks to the community here, and changing that would not be in our best interests.
> Can I ask what this means in terms of ownership of our reviews?
Our policies have not changed. You still have full control of your reviews, just ask you always have.
> I made the choice to not review books on Amazon a long time ago and I will not have that choice taken away from me.
Where you review books is your choice. Your Goodreads reviews are under your control to manage.
> I wouldn't mind some bits of integration between Goodreads and Kindle users along the lines of updating reading progress or viewing Goodreads book pages straight from a Kindle book, etc.
We're looking forward to building that!
> I have to say that this (Amazon's share) has not ruined LibraryThing at all (from my point of view as a user), so we can be optimistic about Goodreads too?
I'm very confident that Goodreads is going to get a lot better. Think about Google buying Youtube, or eBay buying Paypal - I think it's going to be the same kind of thing here.
> Will goodreads be under the same constraints that Amazon has enforced on their site - namely censorship of topics they deem inappropriate reading material?
We will be continuing to make policy decisions based on what we feel is best for the Goodreads community.
> And there will also likely be a "like" and a "don't like" button for both comments and reviews.
I like the idea of a "like" button for comments actually. But a "don't like" would be too negative.
> What does this mean for Goodreads users? I don't hate Amazon but I don't use t for a reason. Goodreads, is my place to find UNBIASED reccomendations for books. I don't want to log into Goodreads and see a billion Amazon ads hacking stuff at me. How will this merg effect Goodreads specifically? Am I expected to log in with my Amazon info? Am I expected to only add "kindle" editions to my "To Be Read" shelf?
I think you'll find that very little changes on Goodreads itself, other than changes and improvements we would have been making anyways. We plan to eventually give members the option to connect their Goodreads and Amazon account, in order to be able to pull your purchase history in and rate/review your books. We also plan to add various integrations on Kindle devices and apps to make it easier for readers to share what they are reading.
> What BunWat said, among others. I am certain Otis and company don't PLAN for any changes -- but once the papers are signed and the power shifts, what they plan and what becomes fact may have no relationship to each other.
All I can say to this, is that Amazon shares the goal we have of growing Goodreads into a larger, more vibrant community. It's the reason they are buying us, and I am personally excited to innovate with them on what the future of reading looks like.
> If they could say we are getting re-reading option, and a-b-c bugs fixed,
Not sure about the priority of re-reading, but we expect this will enable us to focus a lot more on exciting new features for the community, and bug fixes too.
> We're providing you feedback, begging you to provide answers as to what this means. If you're listening, why aren't you answering the questions with actual information rather than platitudes?
We are doing our best, which is all we can do. I remain committed to this website, and this community, and appreciate your patience. We will continue to communicate with you and share updates as we have them.
> Goodreads does not exist independently of its members. You are Goodreads. I am Goodreads. We are Goodreads. We made it the attractive commodity it has become.
I love that you said that, it's exactly how I feel. Goodreads is indeed the sum of the amazing people here. It's something I cherish and treasure, and am honored to be the steward to help it continue to grow. I wake up every day thinking about Goodreads and how to make it better.
As you might imagine, it's been a big day, and the team has been working hard. I'll be online tomorrow to answer more questions."
Congratulations!I don't know why so many people are disappointed by this news. GR will now have much better servers, which means the site won't be down as much as it was before (and when all of you were cursing about it).
Connecting Kindle and GR is really great opportunity. This will be really awesome.
And it's not like GR will suddenly become paying service or whatever... Think about Otis and Elizabeth, who worked hard with this project - project that was their job and their love. They deserve something better, something new... and Amazon can give them that.
I doubt that Amazon will change the main idea about GR, because Amazon bought GR BECAUSE of users and reviews - they won't destroy that - they are not stupid, they are businessmen :)
Congratulations again. I'm really happy that you got this far!
Sorry Otis and Elizabeth but while I am sure the money in your bank accounts is great news I really don't see this as a good move for the site either; the loss of independence and the loom of the large, intrusive, corporation will take away the sparkle that this site has, the feeling of community replaced by one of being used by those seeking to make a fast buck to our detriment. I do not imagine for one moment that 'team bezos' will permit the site to operate without their heavy influence and without grabbing all that valuable user data. Most depressing... A very sad day.
For anyone who wants to see Otis' response to some of the questions raised in this thread (which I've cut and pasted above), you can find it on page 15.
I'm not so sure about this. Goodreads is for readers and I wonder about confidentiality. Is money talking here?
Like a lot of people, I am very disappointed with this. I don't resent you making money from your work, and in your position I would have done the same thing, but I am not sure that I will be as enthusiastic promoting goodreads now that it is a part of Amazon. I can't help but feel that anything I enter on goodreads is now no longer for the good of the community but for the data-mining of an aggressive multinational.
As an author, and a reader, I'm pleased with this news. In recent times, Goodreads made it more difficult to add mine and my husband's published books from Amazon to Goodreads. I'm sure this will much improve that. And for Otis and Elizabeth this is good news, and proud news to have accomplished what they have with Goodreads.
I guess this means that like Shelfari we'll be manipulated to sign in through Amazon. Shelfari don't support signing in through Amazon.co.uk - only .com - which isn't good for those of us who don't shop on the US site.I'm pleased for you guys - a lot of hard work has gone into this site and it's good you're going to reap big financial rewards, but I'm also a little sad that GR is losing its independence.
Time will tell...
Lynne wrote: "I'm not so sure about this. Goodreads is for readers and I wonder about confidentiality. Is money talking here?"I think it is. *sigh* people these days.
I really hopes this is true. I don't post reviews on Amazon fo..."
They did it with Book Depository and the other Amazon acquired companies like iMDB