It is a legitimate problem, when they could previously be a reseller because the publishers were giving them a discount of 50% (or more), not huge profits but a respectable sales business.
But then Apple came along and said, "No, if you want to play ball on our gear you have to do this "agent" stuff, and abide by our pricing restrictions".
*The publisher is now the retailer of record. The company selling the eBook to the end user is an “agent” of the retailer who receives a commission on the sale.
*All sales agents are required to sell books at the same retail price, which is set by the publisher. No one can sell at a different price.
*All sales agents get a 30% commission on the sale of a book. No one gets a different deal. Prior to the agency model, publishers typically offered retailers a 50% discount.
Them making an e-reader app is irrelevant in this case, because the same rules apply to *anyone* who wants to sell ebooks. It's the same idea in which you walk into Barnes & Nobles, or Borders, who are not really publisher but book stores, except they sell digital books. Its the same as any e-commerce. They can only make 30% off the sale of the book. They can't charge a few dollars less to make up the cost with stimulating more sales because Apple says everyone MUST sell for the same price.
So no matter who is selling the ebook, whatever the price, they get 30% of the money. Then Apple comes knocking and says "Ahem, we are entitled to 30% of the selling price of the book for the privilege of you being able to sell to our customers".
Where did the profit go??? There is none. Apple essentially takes your entire commission on the sale of the book.
I don't see that as wanting to be a publisher. I see it as wanting to sell ebooks to online customers.
But everything about this Agent model is clearly an attempt by Apple to make it impossible for anyone but Apple to actually make money selling eBooks.
At the very least, it is extremely anti-competitive behavior on the level of Microsoft. I never see anyone cry about Apple's anti-competitive behavior though, oddly enough, since it seems like they are suing somebody new every month.
Anyway, we will just have to disagree. I don't have the will to keep going with this. Anyone who reads this can do their own research and come to their own conclusions.
