Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Turfscape (< 20)

Apple, e-books and the free market



July 10, 2013 – Comments (8)

Apple is guilty, according to a Federal judge.

So, I'm trying really hard to understand what Apple did wrong here. They opened a storefront for book publishers to sell their wares. Apple said "publishers, sell at your own prices...whatever you think is fair. We're charging a 30% convenience fee for use of the store". Apple said "in a sense of fairness, the same deal holds true for all publishers. We're not cutting special deals fo Simon and Schuster and worse deals for Random House. It's a level playing field".

The government now says that's not fair. It's price fixing (to allow the product owner to set their own price of their own volition without any influence from the storefront) and it's a conspiracy against Amazon. Meanwhile Amazon tells publishers we won't carry your e-books unless you agree to our price of $9.99. And Amazon needs to be protected in that manner, because otherwise publishers would have an option to make more money somewhere else?

Thank goodness we live in a capitalist society with a free market.

I guess I just don't quite get it.

8 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On July 10, 2013 at 1:00 PM, L0RDZ (91.34) wrote:

Oh Please...  Apple  is   such   a  master manipulator,   apple  did  not  say  sell  at  your  own  prices...   apple  worked  to  increase  its  fees  and  the  cost  of  books.

They got  caught  ~  there's  no  disputing  that  fact...

NEW YORK (AP) — Apple Inc. conspired with publishers to raise electronic book prices, a federal judge ruled today, saying the evidence left no doubt that the computer maker broke antitrust laws.


U.S. District Judge Denise Cote said Apple knew that no publisher could risk acting alone to try to eliminate’s $9.99 price for the most popular e-books so it “created a mechanism and environment that enabled them to act together in a matter of weeks to eliminate all retail price competition for their e-books.”...

May  the  maggots smack  their  lips  and  cry  delicious  on  the  late  Jobs.

In  this  case  the market  forces  were  Apple  Rigged...

And  a  court  of  law  agreed.

If  you still  don't  get  it ?  well  T  maybe  you should buy some clues or  vowels  to help you solve  your  confusion.


Report this comment
#2) On July 10, 2013 at 1:12 PM, L0RDZ (91.34) wrote:

The Wall Street Journal calls Wednesday’s ruling “a stern rebuke” for Apple. It notes that the five publishers Apple was accused of colluding with “have all since entered into settlements with the Justice Department, as well as in a separate lawsuit by a group of state attorneys general. But Apple refused to settle and decided to go to trial.”

 It's  funny  imagine  6 criminals  getting together  to  discuss and  plan  the  killing  of  say  some guy named  amazon.

Uncle  Leo  happens  to be  paying attention  and notices the crime,  5  of  the  6  criminals  plea bargain  and  only  billy bad apple  is  conceited enough  to  go  to  trial.

So  whats the punishments ?  is  anyone  going to jail ?

The Sherman Act imposes criminal penalties of up to $100 million for a corporation and $1 million for an individual, along with up to 10 years in prison. Under federal law, the maximum fine may be increased to twice the amount the conspirators gained from the illegal acts or twice the money lost by the victims of the crime, if either of those amounts is over $100 million.

I would love to see  an  Apple  exec  head  to some  scarey prison.


Report this comment
#3) On July 10, 2013 at 1:43 PM, somrh (85.75) wrote:

It appears to have more to do with the fact that Apple met regularly with the CEOs of 5 publishers for the sole purpose of collusion to raise prices.That's my best estimation of it after reading a portion of the opinion.

The model doesn't appear to be under scrutiny; Amazon actually has a similar pricing model with self-publishers: see here and here.

Granted, my understanding of law is limited so take that with a grain of salt. 

Report this comment
#4) On July 10, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Turfscape (< 20) wrote:

>>In  this  case  the market  forces  were  Apple  Rigged...<<

They had already been rigged by Amazon.

But, the facts as entered into evidence are far from clear that Apple colluded on price. That's what's astonishing here. Apple may have set a playing field that allowed the publishers to collude, but there was no evidence that Apple sought any price, let alone higher prices. From my point of view, Apple saw an advantage in attracting publishers so that the Apple store would have premium product for consumers. Amazon sought the advantage of lowest price by forcing publishers into selling at a dictated price (which they were able to do due to their market dominant/monopolistic position). The difference here is that the Amazon agreement restricted the market for the seller...and the result of the Apple agreement raised prices for consumers.

>>apple  did  not  say  sell  at  your  own  prices...  <<

In fact, the court evidence showed that that's EXACTLY what Apple said to publishers.

>>well  T  maybe  you should buy some clues or  vowels  to help you solve  your  confusion.<<

Do you really feel like that kind of asinine response was appropriate or warranted?

Report this comment
#5) On July 10, 2013 at 3:05 PM, L0RDZ (91.34) wrote:

HMM  the late  not  so  great  Jobs  own  words  were used  to  help prove  beyond  a  shadow of  doubt  the  guilt  apple played in  its antitrust  case.

I think it  went  down like  this  Jobs  buys an e book  at  his  own store  for  14.99  when  its  readily  available  for  9.99  elsewhere.

When someone  with  reasonable skills  questioned him about  paying  50%  more  for  the same  e book (readily available elsewhere),  his  response  was  something  like this  don't  worry  about  it  soon  all  the ebook prices will all be  the same.

Hmm  how  did he know  that ?

Well it  was  determined  that  the late  Jobs  conspired  and colluded  with  the major publishers  to break  Amazon's  low pricing of  e books.

Why ??  to  make  more  money.

Lets  face it    Apple  is  not  in  business to make  things  less expensive  for  customers,  if  anything  they would  rather  stick  the  idiots who buy  their  products with  the  highest  possible  price  tags.

Oh sure they have no problems  paying  the least possible  for  labor  outside of  their   bogus  designed in california  destination.

Why because  it  makes  them feel  good  for over paying  ~  after all  they  are  brain-washed.

Junk thats manufactured  in  China...

Brain-washing  done  by  old hippies  on  acid  ~  meth ~  coke ~  and  thc  trips...

who happen  to  be in  the  education  or  more so  dis-education  industry  which  is  chaining  stupid  students  with  debts that  cannot  be  repaid  for  overly  priced  education  made  readily  available  from  tax payers  and  the  fact that said debt  cannot  disapear.




Report this comment
#6) On July 10, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Turfscape (< 20) wrote:

>>his  response  was  something  like this  don't  worry  about  it  soon  all  the ebook prices will all be  the same.<<

According to the court documents, his response was 'we don't dictate price. The publishers do'.

>>Lets  face it    Apple  is  not  in  business to make  things  less expensive  for  customers<<

No company is in business to make things less expensive for customers. All companies are in businesss to profit. Sometimes that profit is generated by offering up lower price as the competitive advantage. Sometimes it's by offering the product producers a more attractive marketplace for selling their wares.

>>Oh sure they have no problems  paying  the least possible  for  labor  outside of  their   bogus  designed in california  destination<<

Seriously, when did you become so vehemently anti-capitalist? Perhaps you can convince congress to nationalize all U.S. businesses so you can control the means of production as well as the pricing?

Report this comment
#7) On July 16, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Melaschasm (70.21) wrote:

According to early accusations, and the court opinion seems to verify the claims, Apple conspired with the major book publishers to prevent Amazon from selling ebooks for less than what Apple was charging.

This is a classic anti-trust case, and while such things can be hard to prove, the evidence was reasonably strong that Apple was involved in a price fixing deal.

It was rather suspicious that all the major publishers announced that they would no longer allow Amazon to sell ebooks for $10 right when Apple began selling ebooks for $15. 

Report this comment
#8) On January 31, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Mary953 (84.43) wrote:

Amazon - check

EBay - check

Used book stores - check

Barnes and Noble - check


Borrow from friends - check

Costco or Sams - check

Walmart, Target, etc - check

Requirement anywhere that it is necessary to buy from Apple - nope, no check.

If you choose to buy from Apple rather than checking out your other options, if you choose to pay more rather than simply entering the name and author into Google to check your other options, if you choose not to call your library, your friends, your used book stores to see if anyone has a book available for loan or purchase, then you have made a foolish choice and I DO NOT want to hear you whine about it.  Nor do I want to hear that you are taking up the time of the nation's judiciary system.  Due diligence is not just something you use for stock selection.  It goes into every aspect of your life. Be creative.  You have a library.  If it does not have your book, it still has a librarian that can offer ideas of places that have the books you want.  Use your resources.  (fwiw, reference librarians should be able to be resources on all areas, not just books.  Call and ask.  If they don't know, they will ask around and call you back with suggestions!  Yes, I do know this.  It was my profession and I loved helping people!  (as if you couldn't tell) 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners