I feel like this entire argument is less against Amazon and more against modern economics. The author attacks two trademarks of the Amazonian publishing spectrum: algorithmic pricing and a diminished sense of competition.
The first, I think, is difficult to make because you're saying "hey, this pricing scheme is arbitrary and capricious" when the current model of publishers setting prices for goods seems equally arbitrary. Books are art with little intrinsic value -- if you were to ask me to value a book in my collection, the answer would range from less than a dollar to thousands of dollars, with little in between. I'm not saying demand is a perfect proxy for value, but I think its better than the other options. (I feel the same way about clothes. Any pricing scheme where there's a systematic understanding that everyone is going to discount the hell out of the base price is, I think, a flawed scheme.)
The second, I think is much more valid overall but the same points could be made about Barnes & Noble or Borders, back in the day. (Remember You've Got Mail?)
A much bigger and interesting topic of discussion, I think, is what happens ten years from now when eBooks become the du jour method of literary consumption. Personally, I'm looking forward to the Bandcamp of poetry.
There is already an absurd amount of literary content freely created online by millions of people. And most of the sites offer some ranking system to filter the crap out. I think I bought my last book ever in college, considering I have an infinite supply of 15 - 25 year old Tolkein's works available that they put out for free because they just want people to enjoy their writings if I look hard enough.
I've acquired about five self-published books at a very low cost (including free) and they've all been shit. I have a hard time buying something these days that I don't think had an editor work through it, but I am concerned that editors will play a smaller and smaller role in the book business going forward.
The first, I think, is difficult to make because you're saying "hey, this pricing scheme is arbitrary and capricious" when the current model of publishers setting prices for goods seems equally arbitrary. Books are art with little intrinsic value -- if you were to ask me to value a book in my collection, the answer would range from less than a dollar to thousands of dollars, with little in between. I'm not saying demand is a perfect proxy for value, but I think its better than the other options. (I feel the same way about clothes. Any pricing scheme where there's a systematic understanding that everyone is going to discount the hell out of the base price is, I think, a flawed scheme.)
The second, I think is much more valid overall but the same points could be made about Barnes & Noble or Borders, back in the day. (Remember You've Got Mail?)
A much bigger and interesting topic of discussion, I think, is what happens ten years from now when eBooks become the du jour method of literary consumption. Personally, I'm looking forward to the Bandcamp of poetry.