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
August 25, 2014 -- Updated 1950 GMT (0350 HKT)
Julian Zelizer says it's not crazy to think Mitt Romney would be able to end up at the top of the GOP ticket in 2016.
August 25, 2014 -- Updated 2052 GMT (0452 HKT)
Roxanne Jones and her girlfriends would cheer from the sidelines for the boys playing Little League. But they really wanted to play. Now Mo'ne Davis shows the world that girls really can throw.
August 25, 2014 -- Updated 1629 GMT (0029 HKT)
Peter Bergen and Emily Schneider say a YouTube video apparently posted by ISIS seems to show that the group has a surveillance drone, highlighting a new reality: Terrorist groups have technology once only used by states
August 25, 2014 -- Updated 2104 GMT (0504 HKT)
Kimberly Norwood is a black mom who lives in an affluent neighborhood not far from Ferguson, but she has the same fears for her children as people in that troubled town do
August 22, 2014 -- Updated 2145 GMT (0545 HKT)
It apparently has worked for France, say Peter Bergen and Emily Schneider, but carries uncomfortable risks. When it comes to kidnappings, nations face grim options.
August 26, 2014 -- Updated 1727 GMT (0127 HKT)
John Bare says the Ice Bucket Challenge signals a new kind of activism and peer-to-peer fund-raising.
August 22, 2014 -- Updated 1231 GMT (2031 HKT)
James Dawes says calling ISIS evil over and over again could very well make it harder to stop them.
August 24, 2014 -- Updated 0105 GMT (0905 HKT)
As the inquiry into the shooting of Michael Brown continues, critics question the prosecutor's impartiality.
August 22, 2014 -- Updated 2247 GMT (0647 HKT)
Newt Gingrich says it's troubling that a vicious group like ISIS can recruit so many young men from Britain.
August 21, 2014 -- Updated 1450 GMT (2250 HKT)
David Weinberger says Twitter and other social networks have been vested with a responsibility, and a trust, they did not ask for.
August 22, 2014 -- Updated 1103 GMT (1903 HKT)
John Inazu says the slogan "We are Ferguson" is meant to express empathy and solidarity. It's not true: Not all of us live in those circumstances. But we all made them.
August 22, 2014 -- Updated 1223 GMT (2023 HKT)
Retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling says he learned that the territory ISIS wants to control is amazingly complex.
August 20, 2014 -- Updated 1951 GMT (0351 HKT)
Cerue Garlo says Liberia is desperate for help amid a Ebola outbreak that has touched every aspect of life.
August 21, 2014 -- Updated 1742 GMT (0142 HKT)
Eric Liu says Republicans who want to restrict voting may win now, but the party will suffer in the long term.
August 21, 2014 -- Updated 1538 GMT (2338 HKT)
Jay Parini: Jesus, Pope and now researchers agree: Wealth decreases our ability to sympathize with the poor.
August 21, 2014 -- Updated 1200 GMT (2000 HKT)
Judy Melinek offers a medical examiner's perspective on what happens when police kill people like Michael Brown.
August 19, 2014 -- Updated 2203 GMT (0603 HKT)
It used to be billy clubs, fire hoses and snarling German shepherds. Now it's armored personnel carriers and flash-bang grenades, writes Kara Dansky.
August 20, 2014 -- Updated 1727 GMT (0127 HKT)
Maria Haberfeld: People who are unfamiliar with police work can reasonably ask, why was an unarmed man shot so many times, and why was deadly force used at all?
August 18, 2014 -- Updated 2152 GMT (0552 HKT)
Ruben Navarrette notes that this fall, minority students will outnumber white students at America's public schools.
August 19, 2014 -- Updated 2121 GMT (0521 HKT)
Humans have driven to extinction four marine mammal species in modern times. As you read this, we are on the brink of losing the fifth, write three experts.
August 18, 2014 -- Updated 2006 GMT (0406 HKT)
Pepper Schwartz asks why young women are so entranced with Kardashian, who's putting together a 352-page book of selfies
ADVERTISEMENT