Skip to main content

A dark day for the future of books

By Mark Coker, Special to CNN
April 16, 2012 -- Updated 0201 GMT (1001 HKT)
People looking at an e-book reader app on the Apple iPad.
People looking at an e-book reader app on the Apple iPad.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • The Justice Department filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple and five publishers
  • Coker: Government's intention to protect consumers could end up harming consumers
  • He says threat to the agency pricing model hurts retailers, authors and publishers
  • Coker: Pricing decisions should rest with authors and publishers rather than retailers

Editor's note: Mark Coker is the founder of Smashwords, an e-book publishing and distribution company. Follow him on Twitter.

(CNN) -- Wednesday was a dark day for the future of books.

The Department of Justice charged Apple and five large book publishers with conspiring to raise e-book prices. Three of the five publishers quickly capitulated rather than face the risk and expense of a protracted legal battle.

Much of the case revolves around the decision of five of the largest six publishers to simultaneously adopt the agency pricing model immediately before Apple launched the iPad and iBookstore in April 2010. At that time, Amazon commanded about 90% of the e-book market. Amazon priced many books at $9.99 -- which was below the cost at which Amazon was paying the publisher -- in an effort to drive e-book adoption among consumers and capture market share.

Mark Coker
Mark Coker

Publishers balked at Amazon's strategy out of concern that low prices could cannibalize their print sales, set unrealistic expectations in the minds of consumers, and lead Amazon to demand e-book price concessions from publishers.

When Steve Jobs offered Apple's proposed agency pricing model to publishers, large publishers welcomed Apple's market entry because they wanted a strong counterbalance to Amazon's market dominance. Under the agency model, publishers set the prices and retailers don't discount.

Critics of the agency model viewed it as an attempt to raise e-book prices. They believe retailer discounting serves an important public service. I see it differently.

While I'm a big fan of discounting and price competition, I think the responsibility for pricing decisions should rest with authors and publishers. If they price fairly and competitively, customers will reward them. If they price too high, customers will migrate to lower-cost books.

Most important, the agency pricing model levels the playing field for e-book retailers. It prevents deep-pocketed retailers or device makers from engaging in predatory price wars to harm competitors or discourage formation of new competitors. It would enable the marketplace to support more retailers, which would mean more bookstores promoting the joys of reading to more readers. And it would force retailers to compete on customer experience rather than price. Customers are best served when we have a vibrant e-book retailing ecosystem.

For authors and publishers, the agency model provides them with greater control over the timing of their promotions and higher per-unit earnings of 70% of the list price as opposed to 50% for the conventional wholesale pricing model. It allows publishers to price their books lower -- to the benefit of customers -- and yet earn the same or greater profit.

There's already indication that some publishers and authors who use the agency model are dropping prices as they compete for customers. At my company, where we distribute over 100,000 e-books on behalf of 40,000 self-published authors and small publishers, the average price of our books is about $3.41, a drop of 25% over the last 18 months.

If the Justice Department prevails with its antitrust lawsuit, the decision might have unintended negative consequences for those who write, publish, sell and enjoy e-books. The government's intention to protect consumers could end up backfiring on consumers by harming retailers, authors and publishers.

It could inadvertently hasten the downfall of the world's largest book publishers by forcing them to comply with onerous conditions outlined in the Justice Department's Competitive Impact Statement. These conditions -- including restrictions on collaboration with fellow publishers and increased federal auditing and reporting requirements -- will increase publisher expenses and slow their business decisions at the very time when publishers need to become faster, nimbler competitors.

I'm not normally a defender of big publishers. They price their books too high, while most of their authors earn poverty wages. They take 12 to 18 months to publish a book -- an anachronism in today's world of instant self-publishing. They often reject talented writers who don't offer the celebrity platforms of more marketable "authors" such as Snooki or Justin Bieber.

Despite the mistakes of the largest publishers, I don't want them to go away. I want them to thrive by becoming more responsive to their customers and authors.

Unfortunately, the self-inflicted wounds of large publishers have already begun to render their businesses less relevant to the future of publishing. Authors are beginning to turn their backs on traditional publishers in favor of self-publishing. Authors are now hiring their own editors, cover designers and marketing consultants. By assuming responsibility for the roles once played by publishers, authors are earning up to 70% of the list price as their e-book royalty versus the 17.5% paid by traditional publishers. They're publishing low-cost e-books that are hitting all the bestseller lists. The all-important access to distribution -- once exclusively controlled by publishers -- is now available to all self-publishing authors.

The next time you see an overpriced e-book, blame the publisher but not the agency pricing model.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Mark Coker.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
July 27, 2014 -- Updated 1615 GMT (0015 HKT)
Megan McCracken and Jennifer Moreno say it's unacceptable for states to experiment with new execution procedures without full disclosure
July 26, 2014 -- Updated 1728 GMT (0128 HKT)
Jeff Yang says it's great to see the comics make an effort at diversifying the halls of justice
July 26, 2014 -- Updated 1555 GMT (2355 HKT)
Rick Francona says the reported artillery firing from Russian territory is a sign Vladimir Putin has escalated the Ukraine battle
July 27, 2014 -- Updated 1822 GMT (0222 HKT)
Paul Callan says the fact that appeals delay the death penalty doesn't make it an unconstitutional punishment, as one judge ruled
July 24, 2014 -- Updated 2225 GMT (0625 HKT)
Pilot Robert Mark says it's been tough for the airline industry after the plane crashes in Ukraine and Taiwan.
July 25, 2014 -- Updated 1510 GMT (2310 HKT)
Jennifer DeVoe laments efforts to end subsidies that allow working Americans to finally afford health insurance.
July 26, 2014 -- Updated 1533 GMT (2333 HKT)
Ruti Teitel says assigning a costly and humiliating "collective guilt" to Germany after WWI would end up teaching the global community hard lessons about who to blame for war crimes
July 25, 2014 -- Updated 1245 GMT (2045 HKT)
John Sutter responds to criticism of his column on the ethics of eating dog.
July 25, 2014 -- Updated 1302 GMT (2102 HKT)
Frida Ghitis says it's tempting to ignore North Korea's antics as bluster but the cruel regime is dangerous.
July 25, 2014 -- Updated 1850 GMT (0250 HKT)
To the question "Is Putin evil?" Alexander Motyl says he is evil enough for condemnation by people of good will.
July 24, 2014 -- Updated 1803 GMT (0203 HKT)
Laurie Garrett: Poor governance, ignorance, hysteria worsen the Ebola epidemic in Sierra Leone, Guinea, Liberia.
July 24, 2014 -- Updated 1349 GMT (2149 HKT)
Patrick Cronin and Kelley Sayler say the world is seeing nonstate groups such as Ukraine's rebels wielding more power to do harm than ever before
July 23, 2014 -- Updated 2205 GMT (0605 HKT)
Ukraine ambassador Olexander Motsyk places blame for the MH17 tragedy squarely at the door of Russia
July 24, 2014 -- Updated 1142 GMT (1942 HKT)
Mark Kramer says Russia and its proxies have a history of shooting down civilian aircraft, often with few repercussions
July 24, 2014 -- Updated 1853 GMT (0253 HKT)
Les Abend says, with rockets flying over Tel Aviv and missiles shooting down MH17 over Ukraine, a commercial pilot's pre-flight checklist just got much more complicated
July 24, 2014 -- Updated 1317 GMT (2117 HKT)
Mark Kramer says Russia and its proxies have a history of shooting down civilian aircraft, often with few repercussions
July 24, 2014 -- Updated 1637 GMT (0037 HKT)
Gerard Jacobs says grieving families and nations need the comfort of traditional rituals to honor the remains of loved ones, particularly in a mass disaster
July 24, 2014 -- Updated 1413 GMT (2213 HKT)
The idea is difficult to stomach, but John Sutter writes that eating dog is morally equivalent to eating pig, another intelligent animal. If Americans oppose it, they should question their own eating habits as well.
July 23, 2014 -- Updated 1630 GMT (0030 HKT)
Bill van Esveld says under the laws of war, civilians who do not join in the fight are always to be protected. An International Criminal Court could rule on whether Israeli airstrikes and Hamas rocketing are war crimes.
July 23, 2014 -- Updated 1408 GMT (2208 HKT)
Gordon Brown says the kidnapped Nigerian girls have been in captivity for 100 days, but the world has not forgotten them.
ADVERTISEMENT