Exciting News About Goodreads: We're Joining the Amazon Family!

Yeah, Lisa. There's actually people not using facebook & the like for the same reasons. And are you saying that, since we dont count "in the grand scheme of things", we might as well stay here? If that's how you decide what's right and wrong in your life, by how what others do, that's fine. But yeah, there's actually people who are idealistic and don't want to give more money to cooperations that suck.

We need to get educated, you say? You don't seem to get the differences between using different sites yourself.

Hope you have fun sleeping with your cash...this good reads was no less than a ponzi scheme. How dare you sell the readers content to amazon? Pure evil man. Can't believe my one time favorite website has come to this.

Lori wrote: "To the extent that the Nook was keeping Barnes & Noble afloat, and that competition was keeping the publishing industry vital, this marks the likely end of Barnes & Noble and harm to the publishing..."

Actually, Nook is a money loser, not keeping BN afloat. The handwriting has been on the wall for BN for quite some time and has little to do with this announcement.

Good news!!!!!

Lea - when I say get educated - I mean just that, like the details of the sale, the terms and conditions, etc. Not blinding striking out without knowledge of direct intrusions into your Goodreads existence. I am a huge supporter of internet privacy rights and there are lots of ways to ensure your privacy out there, even within the corporate environment. Heck, the US government is mining more information on all of us for far more insidious reasons than figuring out what kind of TV we might want to buy.

And I fail to see how people who refuse to use social media for whatever reason, feel comfortable here. This is yet another social media site with all of the same pitfalls. Am I missing something?

Because we lock down our content so it can't be seen outside of Goodreads.

Sumeer wrote: "Can someone please explain to me why this company amazon does not face antitrust litigation? Why us Microsoft the only punching bag when it comes to litigation? Do we want the entire control of the..."

Probably because no one has filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission or the AntiTrust Division of the Department of Justice.

So long as the core principles stay the same, then I'm happy. Congrats! The best integration would be if, on your Kindle, you could click on a book title and have it take you to the purchase funnel for that book on Amazon.

Lewis wrote: "We have enjoyed GR for years without paying a penny. Thank you GR for providing that for us. But we should know there is no such thing as a free ride, and we have no right to expect one. We should ..."

What did Goodreads get from volunteer contributors who significantly added to the monetary value of the site?

Moonlight wrote: "Because we lock down our content so it can't be seen outside of Goodreads."

exactly :)

Disappointed that GR is no longer independent. I fully expect to see a "Buy Now from Amazon"button next to every review on GR.

Brixton wrote: "What did Goodreads get from volunteer contributors who significantly added to the monetary value of the site? "

How many employees would they have to hire to replace volunteer "Librarians"? That's a savings right there.

This sucks!!!!!!!

I'm glad you're happy about this, I'm not. Amazon doesn't have a good track record with the companies it purchases (Shelfari anyone?), and without a CLEAR indication about just who owns the reviews we write I don't imagine a fairly significant portion of your users are enthralled about this either. I'll give you some time to sort things out, and in the mean time I'll be looking for a new site.

Otis wrote: "Hey all,

Here are some answers to questions that a lot of people on this thread and others have had.

> Also, they already own shelfari. What does it mean when they want to own both?
> Great it..."

Otis, I appreciate that you tried to address some of the recurring concerns expressed here. Here's some of my thoughts as I read your reply:

1. I found your post by accident. As you can clearly see, this has generated a LOT of reaction from the users of this site, and your reply is buried in the middle of all the comments. It would be useful if you posted information somewhere more easily accessible to all of us.

2. You assert twice in your reply that Amazon acquiring the companies you mention did not have a detrimental affect on them, yet give no specifics to back that claim. I do see specifics from other people regarding some of those sites, and have had personal negative experience with Audible since its acquisition, to not take your assertion at face value.Examples of improvement from the end users' perspective would be welcome. Further, using google's acquisition of youtube as a positive is confounding to me - in what specific way(s) did that make ANYTHING better for the people using youtube?

In regards to Amazon's practice of censorship, you expressed:

> 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'd love to see a clarification of what you mean by this. How are you determining which are the "best and most relevant" reviews?

and

>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

Sorry, this last response sounds like politician 'diplomacy' - saying nothing specific but leaving the impression that the questioner was absolutely right to be concerned about censorship.

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.

I'm a little confused by this statement. I use a Nook and was actually introduced to Goodreads via a free app on my Nook a few years back. I also have a free Goodreads app on my phone and when reading a book on my phone through overdrive, I can share that book using its Goodreads integration.

Nook already has the capability to share your current status and to rate and review books to facebook or twitter. I'm sure Goodreads could have found a way to work with all e-reader providers to tap into these kinds of features that already exist without being bought by a company that segregates its ebooks more than any other. One of the best things about Goodreads is that it was equal across all platforms. From the sound of this announcement, you will now be shifting your focus to the Kindle and excluding a large portion of readers who use .epub readers; the Nook being only one among many.

it is sad but i am sure that the money was hard to pass up. It reminds me of the justification of Al Gore when he sold his cable station to Al Jazera. lost your way.

Rumor is GR received a low 8 digit buyout (10s of millions of $$$).

Honestly, I would have sold too. Doesn't mean I personally have to be happy about it tho. I'll probably stick around (I haven't seen an ad on the internet in a decade, so don't care about that). But if Amazon intrudes too much, or GR changes too much...I'm out.

I direct your attention to the paid content interview which is chockful of weaselwords. How utterly disappointing. I've exported my info and will be deleting my profile in a few. Too bad.

I exported my lists. If I find another site to use, I'll do so. If not, I'll go back to keeping my own paper and pencil lists. My decision to leave Goodreads will be made when the first Amazon links/ads or whatever appear.

One of the most wonderful thing about this site is the independent - Non affiliation status. A wonderful sit that is swallowed by a big name...I hope does not change things and the site can keep its independence and can keep the ability to purchase books from different sellers and not only Amazon.

Macartney wrote: "This is a big bummer. I understand you guys and your backers are looking to make money, but this has ripped the rug out from under everything I enjoyed about Goodreads. Amazon is undermining and de..."

I second that. Sad day.

After reading Otis' answers to some questions (http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1... post 212), I'm not overwhelmed with confidence that things are going to stay the same/get better. There is just too many vague answers in that.

Lewis wrote: "Peter wrote: "Vivl wrote: "Very interesting analysis of changes that seem to have already have been made to our beloved site: http://ebookfriendly.com/2013/03/29/a..."

I noticed ..."

Well, for a start, I wrote my reviews here for the benefit of a community of readers not for Amazon to use. GR has always had a sneaky little rule that anything you post here belongs to them, now that review will belong to Amazon and I guess they can put it on their sales site if they want to. I'm not at all happy about that because I don't want to support Amazon's predatory business practices. If you don't know what they are, a quick Google search will show you.
But there's another even more important reason. As an Australian, I'm here partly to share my knowledge of and enthusiasm for *Australian* literature. I'm proud that some of my American friends here have sought out the Aussie books I've reviewed and they've enjoyed them. We in The Rest of the World are already being swamped by American culture, and it's not that we don't like or admire it, it's that we want to be ourselves. We want to read about our own people and places just the way Americans do. But Amazon devours and obliterates our small profile on its site, it stocks hardly any of our books produced locally and it certainly doesn't promote them. It acts as if The Rest of the World doesn't exist, especially in the editions it sells.
For example, if an Aussie book IS published in the US, Amazon will sell the US edition or often just the Kindle edition, so the Aussie publisher gets nothing and people can only buy it if they have a Kindle. You can see how that makes it even harder for an Aussie publisher to thrive and be profitable. It will be a tragedy for us if Aussie publishing ceases to be economically viable: if we don't have Aussie publishers publishing our stories about our people and our places, we will have nothing. (Just imagine America without anywhere to publish the great books that define American literature. Think of the books you love and imagine not having them! Imagine if you could only read books from the UK or Europe!)
The loss of GR to Amazon is a bad idea.

My, my, such sturm und drang here.

Let's look at another Amazon acquisition, Audible.com.

Audible, while providing some benefits to Kindle users (such as syncing their audiobook content with content read on the Kindle, so you can, say, listen to one chapter and then read the next), still supports non-Kindle devices, including Apple's iPod/iPad/iWhatever, Blackberry, and the now-defunct Palm (the Audible App for Palm is still available). Audible still supports Braille Plus and Book Port for the visually impaired!

Reviews on Audible are not -- I say again, are not -- copied over to Amazon. For evidence of this, I point to the Audible reviews of On Basilisk Station by David Weber (hey, it was the first book I thought of that was both places) and the Amazon reviews of the same book. See the difference?

In fact, the only reasons you know Audible is part of Amazon is the small "An Amazon Company" on the bottom of the logo and the fact that you can -- but do not have to -- use your Amazon account info to log in. You can still use your Audible account info if you so choose.

Based on this evidence, I see no reason to think that Amazon will treat Goodreads any differently than they have Audible, which has its own review rules, culture, and so on.

So let's all stop with the wailing and gnashing of teeth. Chances are things won't change a great deal around here.

You know what, I'm guessing by the number of comments here that this page has been set up for us to vent about this 'happy' news, but I bet nobody is reading it.
Otis and Elizabeth have set this news up with a folksy little intro about the origins of the site in their living room so that we won't recognise them for what they are, IT entrepeneurs who have just joined the MegeMillions club.
** I suggest that if there isn't some feedback from our pals Otis and Elizabeth addressing the specific concerns raised by these replies, that we all stop raving away to each other because we are just wasting our time.

Lisa wrote: "Wow, people really need to get educated before freaking out. I am seeing a lot of comments regarding the "mining" of data. Most of us have open profiles that have been and will continue to be rip..."

I agree. We should wait and see, and I expect the net result will not be nearly as bad as some of the more hysterical complaints suggest.

David wrote: "My, my, such sturm und drang here.

Let's look at another Amazon acquisition, Audible.com.

Audible, while providing some benefits to Kindle users (such as syncing their audiobook content with cont..."

Actually, they are just like Amazon. Amazon doesn't know that Australian literature exists. When I got my Kindle and could ONLY put audio books on it if I joined Audible, I tried to search Audible to see what *Australian* litfic they had. Couldn't find anything. So I emailed them to ask.
And *just like AMazon* which never responds to any customer feedback, I got *no* reply.
GR has always worked for The Rest of the World as well. With Librarian status, we can add our own books and editions published in Australia.
Try doing that on any Amazon site...

David wrote: "My, my, such sturm und drang here.

Let's look at another Amazon acquisition, Audible.com.

I agree. Probably a tempest in a tea pot.

I'd like to merge my Amazon/Goodreads reading list, because maintaining two lists is just ridiculous.

Amanda wrote: "Amy wrote: "Amanda wrote: "Amy wrote: "I can't help but say that based on the comments of people leaving, their departure will most likely improve the ratings of books here. Without the snobby and ..."

I am not the one giving up on GR just because they have made some money. That is ridiculous. Most leaving won't even wait to see the changes. It is all about the self-righteous stance against big business. If everyone felt that way this country wouldn't exist.

Amazon can't sell australian literature if the publishers won't let it - I loved Bryce Courtenay's work before he died - when I emailed him from the US about his books ever being available over here, I was told that **HIS PUBLISHER** had determined that there wouldn't be enough interest and therefore they were not willing to sell US rights

so my mom bought me his books regularly - that being said, the price of books in australia is outrageous - I grew up there - $10 for a little harlequin novel that I could read in under 2 hours - give me a break - there is no reason for costs like that - or $35-$40 for a new hardcover - if not more - one of the ones I got from my mom was $50

Well, I love Amazon. I buy ALL my books from them as well as other items. I also have several Kindles. I enjoy using Goodreads as well. From the notes above, I see people are concerned and I guess I am missing something but personally I believe this will be a good thing for me as an avid reader. I also would adore it if Amazon would merge with Goodreads our wish lists and to read lists. Boy, would that make my life easier!!!

I have the same reservations expressed earlier. I was not jumping up and down with joy. Change is fine, but I'm not sure I'm thrilled with the tie to Amazon. I don't use just one reader...sometimes it's the Kindle app, but equally I use the Nook app and the Overture app from my public library and the Follett app from my school library. I'm also extremely disappointed that efforts haven't been made to make GoodReads available to schools in a protected environment so that children could begin to use the service. Federal law prohibits users under 13 without written parental permission and since Goodreads did not offer that option, we could not use it with our students. I would have loved to see Goodreads with an option for a school version. I wish GoodReads the best and will wait and see what transpires over the coming years.

Kamas wrote: "After reading Otis' answers to some questions (http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1... post 212), I'm not overwhelmed with confi..."

Yeah, I can just see Otis in his little living room reading through these reviews and thinking, oh no, all my buddies at GR are upset, I must find time in my busy day to reassure them.
What's the betting that the PR manual was written *before* the announcement, and that there is a little team of PR consultants with the Otis Style Manual in front of them, carefully sifting through these posts and responding to the ones that have specific concerns that worry *Amazon* and need to be netralised, eh?

After reading 32 pages of almost only complaints and useless platitudes without any real answers, I can't help but keep wondering...

Are the planned kindle-only features a nice way to say "F*ck you everyone who refuses to buy a kindle"?

Ah well, all good things come to an end - GR just earlier than I expected.

I'm happy for the two founders because they'll come out of this to the good. I'm sad for the rest of us. I have had nothing but issues with Amazon do not want to do business with them. And I certainly don't like the idea of giving them so much information about myself.

I have a Kobo, not a Kindle. I hate to think that Amazon is conquering one more corner of the world.

Dee wrote: "Amazon can't sell australian literature if the publishers won't let it - I loved Bryce Courtenay's work before he died - when I emailed him from the US about his books ever being available over her..."

Did you really grow up in Australia? And yet you use 'mom' not 'mum'??
Anyway, the reason Australian books are expensive is because there are less people to buy them here. So production costs are higher. We in Australia are willing to pay that to have our own stories about our own people and places and that is why we (at the moment) have as many publishers as we do. We don't want to lose that.
It's a matter of public choices: health insurance in the US is expensive and books are cheap; in Australia health insurance is cheap and books are expensive.

Nicole wrote: "P.S. Until this announcement, Goodreads was my favorite site on the internet. I check goodreads more than facebook."
me too

Val wrote: "Nicole wrote: "P.S. Until this announcement, Goodreads was my favorite site on the internet. I check goodreads more than facebook."
me too"

me three

Lisa wrote: "Dee wrote: "Amazon can't sell australian literature if the publishers won't let it - I loved Bryce Courtenay's work before he died - when I emailed him from the US about his books ever being availa..."

Meh: Mum, Mom, Mother, Ma, Isn't it the same thing?

Lisa wrote: "Dee wrote: "Amazon can't sell australian literature if the publishers won't let it - I loved Bryce Courtenay's work before he died - when I emailed him from the US about his books ever being availa..."

I've never lived in Australia but I can see how a smaller population could never achieve the economies of scale that the US can achieve. Fewer people means a much smaller market for selling anything. I've visited Australia many times and I don't really mind how much more things cost. The fact that one gets to buy less means that one values one's possessions more.

Here in the States, where everything is so much cheaper, we can buy the same style of shirt in six different colours, but so what, when being able to consume so much only weighs us down with even more "stuff", and we are no happier for it?

Sorry, got off on a tangent here, and yes, I would move to Australia if the immigration requirements weren't as onerous as the ones for the US. So I content myself with visiting my many, many friends and former classmates as often as I can.

So much for an independent book review site. Since I own a Nook, not a Kindle, I guess I won't be on Goodreads much anymore.

"I will not give in because I oppose it — I do - not my pride, not my spleen, nor any of my appetites, but I do – I!"

Clearly nothing we say here matters. This is not a new experience for almost anyone. Nor, sadly, is this the first time that a site I've enjoyed and used for years has been ground up in the maw of corporate exploitation. Hell, it's not even the first time that Amazon has ruined a site that I liked!

So I'm going to quietly wrap things up here. I'll post no more reviews, nor will I rate books. I've just left all of the Goodreads groups that I was in, apart from a couple of administrative ones.

I've exported my reviews to CSV, and will post them on LibraryThing and elsewhere. I don't think that it's wise to rely on any one website any more. It's all too clear that any website which becomes popular will be gobbled up by the great rapacious economic sharks which rule our world.

So I'll copy my reviews to multiple independent sites, plus my own blogs. Yes, far fewer people will read them. But it's Gideon's Band. Better a few readers with integrity than a mass of mindless Amazon consumers.

As for those who are carousing with glee over this acquisition, I can't help but feel a little bit sorry for you - and, at the same time, disappointed. It's clear that GoodReads will now lose many people, many voices of devoted readers. Don't you care? Does the prospect of gaining a few bells and whistles (perhaps) really offset the loss of trust, and companions, and integrity of this community?

"It profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world ... but for Wales?"

I...won't delete my reviews here yet (and I'm sure some will say "who cares?"), because there are friends here that I value, and interactions that I enjoyed. As soon as Amazon starts intruding, however, I'll pull the switch. That is, if they're still allowing us to terminate our accounts at that point.

In any case I've deleted Amazon from my book sources here on GoodReads - and it was a particularly sleazy move on your part to insert them as #1 - and will do my utmost never to do business with them again, as much as is possible in this world that Big Money owns. I'll buy my books via the website of the Independent Online Booksellers Association (IOBA), when I can't find a book in one of the few remaining local shops which has survived Amazon's onslaught. Their site has actually been equal if not superior to Amazon, for books. I'll search out independent sources for everything else that I might otherwise buy from Amazon - hell, I'll maintain a list of those online sources on my blogs and website, for others who feel as I do!

And now a personal note to Otis and Elizabeth: I don't like you. I was only tangentially aware of your existence during the years that I was on GoodReads, but now every time I scroll past that photo of the two of you smirking at the top of this column, I feel ill and soiled. You played the game, and won; you betrayed the trust of many, many people whose love for books you exploited for a huge cash reward. You're on the top now. You're part of the elite. You'll never have to pretend to care about the little people, ever again.

And since you're the sort of people who would do that to those who trust you, I don't imagine that either of you will ever feel the slightest pang of conscience.

But that said, I still wouldn't trade positions with you. Call me old-fashioned, but I couldn't live with myself knowing that I had betrayed so many decent, intelligent, and basically kind people.

I won't permit myself to be sold. I will NOT be "product".

Goodbye.

Peter wrote: "I've exported my reviews to CSV, and will post them on LibraryThing and elsewhere."

Amazon owns AbeBooks, which owns 40% of LibraryThing.

Tori Benson wrote: "Hmmm. Congrats but I shall hold off on breaking out the champagne."

Yep. Me too.

The Holy Terror wrote: "Peter wrote: "I've exported my reviews to CSV, and will post them on LibraryThing and elsewhere."

Amazon owns AbeBooks, which owns 40% of LibraryThing."

I'm quite aware of that, thank you. That's why I said I'd avoid Amazon "as much as is possible". The owner of LibraryThing has stated that he's opposed to what Amazon is doing (except insofar as it benefit his site). Amazon does _not_ have a controlling interest there, unlike the plantation that GoodReads has become. And LibraryThing will only be one of several sites where I will post my reviews. Among them will be my own Google Plus account, my LiveJournal and Dreamwidth accounts, and probably my own personal website. That's long overdue in any case.

Amanda wrote: "Actually, it's not 40%. Tim has stated before that the number is smaller, but he's legally bound from disclosing the actual amount. Don't know where people are getting the 40% from, it's just not true."

Wikipedia and the press release.

Amanda wrote: "Not sure Wikipedia is the best source for information."

I knew someone would say that! Which is why I linked to the press release which is where the Wikipedia info was sourced.

deleted user wrote: "goodbye goodreads"

Very dramatic.