France Moves To Shield Its Book Industry From Amazon (reuters.com) 121
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Sophie Fornairon's independent bookshop has survived the rise of Amazon thanks to a French law that prohibits price discounting on new books, but she says the e-commerce giant's ability to undercut on shipping still skews the market against stores like hers. Fornairon, who owns the Canal Bookstore in central Paris, now hopes that new legislation that would set a minimum price for book deliveries will even the contest further in the battle of neighborhood stores against Amazon. "It's a just return towards a level playing field," Fornairon, who employs four workers, said. "We're not at risk of closing down any time soon, but Amazon is a constant battle".
French law prohibits free book deliveries but Amazon has circumvented this by charging a single centime (cent). Local book stores typically charge about 5-7 euros ($5.82-8.15) for shipping a book. Amazon's pricing strategy had resulted in the growing market share of a single operator, the Ministry of Culture said. "This law is necessary to regulate the distorted competition within online book sales and prevent the inevitable monopoly that will emerge if the status quo persists," the ministry told Reuters. Centre-right Senator Laure Darcos, who drafted the law, decided upon the minimum delivery charge when she observed how bookstores maintained 70% of their business despite being forced to shut during early COVID lockdowns, because the government reimbursed the shipping fees. "It showed what a brake on business the postage costs are for local bookstores," Darcos said. Asked when the legislation would be enacted, the Ministry of Culture declined to give a date, saying it was too early to say.
French law prohibits free book deliveries but Amazon has circumvented this by charging a single centime (cent). Local book stores typically charge about 5-7 euros ($5.82-8.15) for shipping a book. Amazon's pricing strategy had resulted in the growing market share of a single operator, the Ministry of Culture said. "This law is necessary to regulate the distorted competition within online book sales and prevent the inevitable monopoly that will emerge if the status quo persists," the ministry told Reuters. Centre-right Senator Laure Darcos, who drafted the law, decided upon the minimum delivery charge when she observed how bookstores maintained 70% of their business despite being forced to shut during early COVID lockdowns, because the government reimbursed the shipping fees. "It showed what a brake on business the postage costs are for local bookstores," Darcos said. Asked when the legislation would be enacted, the Ministry of Culture declined to give a date, saying it was too early to say.
So here's an interesting question (Score:5, Interesting)
What is the cost of the monopolized market vs costs incurred with measures like these that prevent monopolization of the market?
Re:So here's an interesting question (Score:5, Insightful)
Cost isn't the issue. If Amazon drives all the other book sellers out of business and then decides they don't like you, you can't buy books anymore.
So either there is a functional market, or Amazon gets regulated like a utility. France would apparently prefer there to be a market.
Japan too. The Japanese government is introducing a minimum delivery cost.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Cost isn't the issue. If Amazon drives all the other book sellers out of business and then decides they don't like you, you can't buy books anymore.
So either there is a functional market, or Amazon gets regulated like a utility. France would apparently prefer there to be a market.
Japan too. The Japanese government is introducing a minimum delivery cost.
Yup, that sounds about right:
Amazon is trying to drive competition out of business through dumping. This is what the big supermarket chains in the UK did, show up, dump product until competitors are out of business, then norma
Re:So here's an interesting question (Score:5, Insightful)
Or sometimes outright kill a market. My ex was big into hobbies, and when Walmart moved in to town, they had their sewing and hobby section, and could sell at such low prices that the local fabric and hobby stores all went broke in a few years. Then, just like that, when Walmart decided it was time to put the grocery stores out of business, it killed the hobby and fabric section of the local store to make room for an expanded grocery section. Now there's no hobby stores in town, and with pretty high startup costs for these kinds of stores, I doubt there ever will be again.
At some point, if you want to have a functioning market with actual competition, you've got to put the brakes on the steam rollers like Amazon, to at least level the playing field. Otherwise, you might as well just burn your main streets to the ground.
Re: (Score:2)
At some point, if you want to have a functioning market with actual competition, you've got to put the brakes on the steam rollers like Amazon, to at least level the playing field. Otherwise, you might as well just burn your main streets to the ground.
In the UK towns what used to be the shopping streets are mostly boarded up and rotting away. I dunno about burning them but taking a bulldozer to those houses or replacing them with another row of fast food joints and and pound stores would probably be an improvement. Anybody in the speciality store business has two choices, go out of business or move online. If you take the latter choice you are increasingly being forced into the clutches of some gatekeeper like Amazon or E-bay. There is no escaping these
Re: (Score:2)
I remember the days of people complaining about Walmart. It seemed like nothing could stop them
Then out of nowhere Amazon arrived and is endangering Walmart. It's hard to drive anywhere now without seeing at least one Amazon delivery van. There will always be disruptors.
What France is doing is dumb af. I'm old enough to remember what a nightmare it was to find a book you needed for school. Going from B&N to Borders, etc in a quest to find the thing. And then in the end the only hope was to place a
Re: (Score:2)
The problem here is that we had a small monster problem, but it got fixed when an even bigger monster came around. So we still have a monster problem but it's even worst than before.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a false dichotomy. You can have both good things, no need to have it be one or the other.
Besides, the problem with monopolies is that they always use the same procedure: sell cheaper for a while until the market is captured, then when competition died, rise prices to end consumers while reducing pay to providers. You benefit on the short term, and suffer on the long term. Always, invariably, no exceptions ever. Amazon seems good for now because they're still in the process of transitioning from the
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon is already moving to the nickel and dime part. They built Prime on free shipping. Now, they are encouraging you to buy now but ship later to consolidate packaging, ie., cut their costs. WholeFood delivery? Earlier this month, deliveries over $35 were free. Now it's $9.95 and I believe and additional fee if it's under $35. None of that includes the "suggested" tip. Oh, and this is being sold as a way for them to keep the item prices from rising. Amazon Prime Video? I hope you like ads. I don't want to
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon is already moving to the nickel and dime part.
Here in Brazil they're still on the dumping phase. Prime costs 9.90 BRL/month or 89 BRL/year (about 2 USD / 18 USD respectively), with free same-day shipping, ad-free 4-screens UHD-resolution Prime Video, the basic Prime Music package, and lots of discounts. For comparison's sake 2 USD is twice what a no-name pizza joint delivery costs or a little less than a single economy-level 5-day postal service package delivery costs, and half Netflix's cheapest 1-screen at SD-resolution plan costs. The crunch will in
Re: (Score:2)
Walmart kills just about everything. And they weasel their way into having the municipalities help them at this, getting sweetheart deals by paying lower taxes than the competition, or not taxes, in exchange for "jobs". Except the jobs don't show up in big numbers and the competition dries up so there are more unemployed than before. If the town does not agree to the tax deals, then Walmart will set up shop just outside the borders anyway.
I've seen several places where most grocery stores just vanished a
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is a trust issue. By the time Amazon is done, how will it be any different than Standard Oil? You'll have one major player that dominates retail, and can basically force suppliers to price exactly as it wants, and consumers to pay whatever it wants. If everyone waits until it's at AT&T level of dominance, then you're just left with splitting it up into Baby Amazons, which as history has so sadly proven, in the end hasn't worked out much better. In this case, laws and regulations like those in
Re: (Score:2)
Well, "trust" implies the sort of Standard Oil model where you have a collection of supposedly independent corporations, but sharing quite a lot of the same board members and executives, effectively having the same controlling management. Things were set up this way to try and hide the fact that there were distinctly monopolistic practices occuring. Amazon on the other hand is just one corporation. To the bottom rung consumer it's all the same though.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a word similar to monopoly to refer to a market where there's only one buyer - it's called monopsony. It's a lesser used word because monopolies are much easier to come by (one seller) rather than monopsony (one buyer).
Though some companies have come close - Apple was a monopsony for a little while in the digital music market - if you wanted to s
Re: (Score:3)
Amazon is trying to drive competition out of business through dumping.
Also by not paying any taxes, something which smaller business have problems doing.
Re: (Score:2)
In my area at least, it wasn't Amazon that killed the local independent brick-and-mortar book stores, it was Barnes & Noble and Borders. So cry me a bloody river about them getting a taste of their own medicine. That sound you won't hear is that of the world's smallest violin.
But presuming there was a thriving B&M book store scene around to protect in the first place; adding a minimum delivery cost is an odd way to "protect" it. If I were to walk into a book shop and buy something, the delivery c
Re: (Score:2)
If I were to walk into a book shop and buy something, the delivery cost is zero, after all.
The delivery cost for in-store pickup is bus fare to and from the shop, plus time off work if the shop keeps banker's hours due to the Great Resignation.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe you didn't understand what "out of business" means.
In any case, there are examples of this happening. There was one on British TV a few years back where someone returned too much stuff to Amazon and got banned. So did everyone else living at the same address, even if they were unrelated to him. Feel bad for whoever ended up a tenant there after those guys.
Re: (Score:2)
Cost isn't the issue. If Amazon drives all the other book sellers out of business and then decides they don't like you, you can't buy books anymore.
This isn't a realistic concern. If for some reason Amazon decided "they don't like" customers with money, another retailer -- or perhaps even the publisher -- would meet the market demand. It's not like books are unobtainium.
The point is not to make books unobtainium, the point is to make books obtainable only through Amazon, a state of affairs otherwise known as a 'monopoly'.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in a major metropolitan area, and I can think of only one real bookstore within 20 miles, and even its book section is shrinking to make room for videos and gifts and games. You can get books at department stores, but a couple rows of best sellers isn't really the same thing as a bookstore. Bookstores aren't dead, but they're definitely in hospice care.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Aside from Amazon being able to ban customers at will (and no, you don't have enough money that they will give a damn), it's an entirely realistic concern that there would be one corporate entity deciding *which* books you can buy. Local, independent bookstores have a different selection than a multi-national giant like Amazon, including local authors. They often even have this thing called staff that's knowledgeable about the books they sell, so you can ask them questions and they'll help you find what you
Re: (Score:2)
That's the biggest scare-crow of Statists, and it is simply a lie.
For an extensive, full of real world examples counter-point to Libertarian rhetoric, check out BIG by Matt Stoller [substack.com]. His entire work is about uncovering natural monopolies and their strategies. The site has hundreds of articles showing in detail, with hard evidence, how the Mises Institute's first-principles-based armchair reasoning has very little connection to the real world, at least insofar as Libertarian pro-monopolies theory is concerned.
Re: (Score:2)
TLDR — you can link to a particular article, if you wish, I'll read it. But "hundreds of articles" — no, thanks.
Pick any. They're all good. Throw a dice and read the n-th linked one.
No Libertarian is "pro-monopoly"
The problem is that Libertarians think ideologically, and thus outside the real world. Here's how it works: when monopolists want arguments against certain types of governmental interference that will make their lives harder, such as arguments contrary breaking them up into smaller companies, they pay Libertarian think tanks for the ideas that fit the bill; then, when those same monopolists want arguments for certain types of governmental
Re: (Score:2)
You're articulate enough not to need to resort to trolling. Do better.
Re: (Score:2)
I note, you've posted again without actually citing anything...
I did. I mentioned a site in which all articles are about monopolies and monopolistic strategies. But if two clicks is too much, here's a single sample: Amazon Prime Is an Economy-Distorting Lie [substack.com].
Your self-righteous sarcasm reminds me of my own pro-Libertarian posts and discussions from circa 2003, a veritable trip down memory lane, except that a tiring one at that. This is therefore my final reply in this sub-thread. See you around.
Re:So here's an interesting question (Score:4, Interesting)
It's a totally valid point in the long term but it's also impossible to ignore in the short term it costs consumers considerably more.
Then you get the fact that Amazon will still be able to negotiate far cheaper supplier prices with publishers than your local shop, so what then, are we just gonna have a law that says books must have a fixed retail price? And the obscene thing about that is that then Amazon would make even more profit.
Just one approach that might work better, set up some kind of consortium that allows local sellers to band together and hence compete better with Amazon.
min pricing for college books is bad but unlimited (Score:2)
min pricing for college books is bad but unlimited loans makes hard to stop them.
Re: (Score:3)
Uh, yes, that's exactly what the French are doing. It says so right in the summary, no discounting of new books.
Re: (Score:3)
Amazon might make more profit, but it could no longer use dumping as a means to wipe out smaller competitors. It would level the playing field, at least a bit.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, put the real shipping cost into the price. Don't say one centime when everyone with more than two neurons knows that it costs more than that to deliver a book even across the street. Amazon is willing to lose money on shipping just so that competition shrinks. This is classical anti competitive behavior, which was outlawed in the past for monopolies but these days seems to be called standard business practices while most major governments look the other way.
Re: (Score:3)
What is the cost of the monopolized market vs costs incurred with measures like these that prevent monopolization of the market?
Monetarily I don't know but in terms of variety of publications, that will fall off a cliff under a monopoly. As is we have tons of all manner of speciality publishers that don't have all that big of a market share but they cater to all kinds of niche topics. That variety will disappear completely if one company gets to monopolise the literature market and the decision on what is worth publishing gets made by one functionary at Amazon deciding the fate of books by picking away at check boxes in a web interf
Re: (Score:2)
"Capitalism" is technically the wrong word. Capitalism wants a free market, but it also has a lot of other factors such as an investment style (ie, spending and accumulating capital). So in capitalism you seek to maximize profits of your investments, and if that means totally abandoning a free market economy and embracing monopolies in order to maximize your short term profits then it will do so. The purpose of a free market is not to enrich the investment class, but to provide for fair economic access to
Re: (Score:2)
No. Monopoly is the optimal end-stage of capitalism - cornering the market is the dream of every corporation. Yes, the people living in a market economy will thrive if there's competition and free markets, but the goal of capitalism is to maximize profits to the owners which is generally at odds with that.
Modernization Stopped Too (Score:2)
measures like these that prevent monopolization of the market
The problem is that these measures also stop the modernization of the market too so I suspect the cost incurred will be much larger than had they just stopped the monopolization.
Re: Modernization Stopped Too (Score:2)
stop the modernization of the market
How so? Amazon grew quite well from its beginning in the face of numerous bookstores and Publisher's Clearinghouse.
In fact, modernization always tends to occur in the face of entrenched businesses. As long as there isn't significant protection in place. And sometimes even when there is (Uber).
Re: (Score:2)
How so?
It is forcing minimum delivery charges and prevents book discounting both of which will severely hurt the competitiveness of any online bookseller, not just Amazon. I'm no fan of Amazon but blocking innovation and modernization is never the answer.
Think you would need to dig into economic texts (Score:5, Insightful)
Whenever you see a law that looks like it's going to be a pain in the ass to enforce nine times out of 10 there was a damn good reason that law was put in place. The problem is people forget about that damn good reason because the law solved the problem it was meant to solve.
Bottom line human beings have very short memories.
Re: (Score:3)
People like cheap stuff. They don't realize, or at least choose not to see, that there is a cost to be paid; whether it's children working in sweatshops in developing countries, or local stores and smaller retailers being put out of business. They only realize it when the sweat shop burns down with everyone inside, or one day that retailer that was giving them low low prices now surveys the landscape and sees that it does pretty much own the market in which it functions, and starts hiking those prices. And
Re: (Score:2)
[This post was sponsored by Amazon]
Re: (Score:2)
The real question is is a monopolized market, due to unfair business practices, or just do Amazon having a better business model?
If it is just that Amazons Business model is better, then France trying to shield its industry from Amazon, is probably just going to be a losing strategy. However if Amazon is actively doing something to harm or slow the French Business model, then that is an other thing.
Where we draw the line isn't clear and really complex, hence why lawyers and courts often need to get involved
Re: So here's an interesting question (Score:2)
Amazon has a better business model in that it's impractical for independent bookstores to have an inventory as broad as theirs.
There is nothing particularly innovative about it. Think "catalog sales" using the Internet (which describes most bullshit patents these days). They just were not encumbered by a base of retail outlets. Sears could have killed Amazon early on if not for the pushback from their brick and mortar stores.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And early Amazon could also take 3 weeks as well. Amazon as a bookseller was pretty crappy early on, and nothing like their current monolithic dominance these days.
Re: (Score:2)
It's unfair business practices, no question. This is the history of Amazon. It undercut the dominant sellers of books in price, not just by offering a delivery convenience. And it did this by not collecting sales tax. Word got around and people would buy online, and occasionally wink and promise to pay it on the tax forms later... Then Congress in it's infinite lack of wisdom decided to give the internet a pass on sales taxes because they didn't want to kill the goose that was laying the golden dotcom
Re: (Score:2)
It means you can't operate at a loss just to put others out of business, or side step the rules. Amazon got its big start by failing to collect sales tax on books. So people would go to actual book stores to browse and then buy online and wait a week for delivery.
Disruptive technologies and businesses are not necessarily a good thing, even though the entrepreneurs and those who worship them think so. Disruptive can mean a knock on the door all the way to a nuclear bomb.
The cost here in these laws is triv
Cost to whom? (Score:2)
Define cost and what we're measuring. Cost to whom? Cost to the people who want to buy a book? Long term it's hard to say, undercutting usually only occurs when competition is present. But what about cost to the economy? Do we benefit when our fellow business owners are jobless? Intangible costs? Such as the inability to actually browse through a book before buying? What about cost to the city? Small shop owners attract far more in property taxes and provide for a more livable city than some warehouse in an
Re: (Score:2)
I specifically avoided doing that to get the maximum possible amount of angles on the topic. Because I'm genuinely unsure where the limiting factors lie on this issue in almost all directions. I need some calibration from the crowd on my measuring sticks on all possible directions on this subject.
So I wanted to see the maximally diverse discussion rather than limit it to a preset path.
Re: So here's an interesting question (Score:2)
So... resuming... (Score:4, Insightful)
French Government will make buyers pay full price (no discount) and force also shipment payment.
Let's SUPOSE that full Law is approved.
1) Now, let's be REALISTIC and compare it against the local shop which... DO NOT SHIP books as you GO INSIDE AND BUY IT. So, the Law will be in DIRECT DETRIMENT of online sellers.
2) Now that nobody can make discounts... there's no difference between local/online shops, thus FORCING FULL PRICE on buyers.
So... what this Law will accomplish is to PUNISH online shops and buyers while making no change whatsoever to local stores.
Re: (Score:3)
So... what this Law will accomplish is to PUNISH online shops and buyers while making no change whatsoever to local stores.
Maybe they feel that online sales are harmful to society, which loses something when it loses local bookstores. I'm not sure I agree as long as libraries exist, but at least the argument is obvious.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I do hope you were being sarcastic with your last trailing statement....right?
Re: So... resuming... (Score:2)
He's never seen newsreels of tractors blocking Paris traffic when the farmers get pissed off about something.
Re: (Score:2)
I was taking issue with the implied belief that culture only exists in big cities, but you also have a point.
Re:So... resuming... (Score:4, Insightful)
So, when the government or congress votes a bill about culture, you must always see it as another part of cultural centralization and privileged-class entertainments.
On a final note, while my post was mostly about France, I guess that it also applies to many other countries. Small town have less cultural outlets than big cities.
Re: (Score:2)
I live in a semi-rural community. Twenty years ago we had two book stores, one that specialized in new books, and a used book store (which was an awesome store, and I personally probably paid a couple of the guy's mortgage payments over the years I frequented it). Today, there's the book and magazine section at Walmart.
This law might just incentivize book stores in larger centers to start their own e-commerce sites and start shipping out to rural communities. Knowing that Amazon could not just sell new rele
Re: (Score:2)
This is aimed more at other online retailers, who can't compete on delivery cost with Amazon that has a huge distribution network. Amazon has driven down costs by selling more than just books through its network, and also by making huge losses.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"My honest opinion is that Amazon was the best thing to happen to both readers and authors..."
You say that now. If Amazon is the last man standing, consumers and authors both will be held hostage to Amazon. I don't see how that's a good thing at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So... what this Law will accomplish is to PUNISH online shops and buyers while making no change whatsoever to local stores.
Almost: It will punish online-only shops.
But since certain online-only shops aren't competing on a level field with the tax-paying ordinary shops then a lot of people might think that's perfectly OK. Me included.
EU Single Market (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Going to local shops is rarely free though. You have to drive there, pay for parking, or get the bus. One of the reasons I buy less in physical shops now (there are many, this is just one) is that even with delivery it's often cheaper just ordering it online anyway.
Online shops still have major advantages. No opening times, lower rent. Being open on Christmas day, for example lets them get a huge amount of trade from people who got gift cards or cash and are bored.
Re: (Score:2)
Going online is RARELY FREE too. You have to buy a mobile phone or PC, pay for electricity, housing, Internet connections, etc.
So... your reason fails miserably when contested against reality.
Re: (Score:2)
That's only true if you weren't already online.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously you must live in or near a city because those of us in the suburbs do not pay for parking at book stores. We drive there, park in a big, wide parking lot with plenty of spaces, and waddle our (not mine, mind you) fat asses into the store.
Buses also do go to these places and drop you off near the store.
Re: (Score:2)
The parking lots aren't free, the cost is just added on to the rent in the attached shops, and on to the cost of things you buy.
You've got it backwards (Score:2)
The French government is doing the right thing here. But
Re: (Score:2)
You're the one who got it wrong.
I'm not talking about Amazon, I'm talking about the DISCRIMINATORY CONSECUENCIES of a FAULTY LAW to be passed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So... what this Law will accomplish is to PUNISH online shops and buyers while making no change whatsoever to local stores.
Yes exactly. But I'm confused as to your capitalisation. You seem to think that regulation that maintains market competition and protects local businesses is in some way a bad thing? I take it you're American and are perfectly comfortable fucking your own city to save a dollar and putting locals out of business in favour of supporting some mega warehouse outside the city?
Not everyone sees unchecked capitalism as a net benefit to society. Sometimes being punished by paying more is far better for everyone. He
Let's suppose... (Score:2)
Let's SUPOSE...
Let's suppose we also use caps less. It's obnoxious when used this much and quite a lot of people will take you less seriously. I know I didn't even bother to read your post after noticing all the crazy caps use.
Re: (Score:3)
Let's suppose you would have anything to apport to the conversation... Sadly you didn't.
Now, I'm using the plain old text so... for EMPHASYS I use caps, as have been in use for MILLENIA (in fact, small letters were not even invented then) before you complained about them.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, if you want to keep abusing caps lock feel free. I was just letting you know people will take you less seriously for it regardless of your personal circumstances.
I should also add it would be the same if you abused bold text or italics.
Oh boy (Score:2)
Don't tell them about e-books!
Re: (Score:2)
Except for the "new book" part. Of course one could always have a middle-man convert from "new" to used, and sell it back circumventing that law.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't tell them about e-books!
Except that the e-books sold by Amazon suck ass. Of all the e-book formats on the market I struggle to think of any that is even close to being as bad as Amazon's e-book format, let alone one that is actually worse. PDF for all it's antiqueness is way better than whatever ungodly disaster of a file format the Amazon Kindle reader uses and the reader itself should get an award for "Worst UI design".
Local (Score:2)
End of books (Score:5, Interesting)
People still like physical books. People still want to help bookstores and authors. But the bookstores have not innovated in a 50 years and the cost of doing business is more than the market can bear. Publishers are already charging huge sums for ebooks, once the won the right to gorge customers in their lawsuit against Amazon. They severely limit the number of copies of e books a library can have rights to. And now bookstores are going to screw their customers by pushing the full cost of shipping rather than maybe splitting the difference. I donâ(TM)t buy real books, though I do have a Kirby for them, because of these shenanigans.
Re: (Score:2)
Bookstores may not have, but just like in other mediums, including music, authors have many alternative ways of getting their product to customers. From E-books straight from the author to print-on-demand shops. [lulu.com] Honestly the only ones complaining at this point are those that want to be part of the established system.
Re: (Score:2)
the mixtape culture which was pirating, but drove sales, is gone.
Is this a bad thing? You say it like it's a bad thing but ultimately total revenues for the music industry haven't actually changed implying that there wasn't a net loss due to this move.
That is quite unlike what the likes of Amazon and Walmart typically do to a market which is come in, undercut, drive small shops out of business, and then raise their prices thanks to a lack of competition all while leaving "For Lease" signs in their wake.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought a Kirby was a vacuum cleaner, but I have never been to France.
Re: (Score:2)
What's a Kirby? Is that what you kids call a hard-on?
It's the name of a Nintendo character, that's why they capitalized it.
Wrong name (Score:2)
Keeping prices artificially high just kills the book industry, not protect.
The Germans already failed.
Buggy whips (Score:5, Insightful)
Gotta protect those buggy whip manufacturers. Seriously: how much longer will print books be a major part of the market? Speaking only for myself, I have bought exactly one physical book in the past year (as a gift). All of the books I have bought for myself - fiction and nonfiction - have been ebooks. Granted, I'm a techie, but I'm also the "older" generation. I can only imagine that younger people are even less likely to buy physical books.
So sure, France, go ahead and protect your print book industry. It won't matter in the long run.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Buggy whips (Score:5, Insightful)
For a while when e-ink book readers were introduced, e-books became quite popular. I saw them in public all the time. And I knew many people with them who bought e-books on Amazon all the time. Now ebook readers are very rare to see in public. I assume many people read books on their phones now. But currently I don't know anyone other than me who actively buys e-books. But physical books, either purchased, or borrowed from a library or friend seem are as popular as ever. Doesn't look like e-books are replacing physical books at all. Furthermore I don't think France is worried about regulating e-books. This law is aimed at physical book sales, which Amazon is dominating and driving out the book stores by dumping.
Re: (Score:2)
Gotta protect those buggy whip manufacturers. Seriously: how much longer will print books be a major part of the market?
Err no. Wrong comparison. This is protecting the buggy whip retail shops, against "big Dick's discount buggy whip mega warehouse - lowest prices guaranteed". Books in print shows zero signs of slowing down. In fact the world wide record for physical book sales was in ... 2020 which saw an 8% y-y increase over 2019 which itself was on already trending upwards.
Re: (Score:2)
It is just you. And to some degree, me as well - I read books on a kindle, especially when I travel (so I can go all carry-on). But people in general are buying more books than ever, and the pandemic has only accelerated that. Physical books are just way more convenient to keep and read and share with friends and family, and if there are illustrations or photos it kind of has to be physically printed. Even simple stuff like a black-and-white map on the first page of a novel will be better in print.
Maybe we need a monopoly tax (Score:2)
Re: Maybe we need a monopoly tax (Score:2)
Wouldn't make a difference. Tax is applied to profits, not revenue. Big companies take what profits they would otherwise have and re-invest it. So, their profits - and tax - are near zero.
Re: (Score:2)
Vive La France (Score:2)
Keep up the good work Paris.
Better get some good lawyers on retainer as I'm sure that Bezos Inc won't like this one little bit.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if you'd want to do that, but if you really wanted to attack the problem at the source, I think you can simply legislate open pricing.
Book publishers would simply publish the price of a book, with possible bulk discounts. Everyone has access to the same pricing. If bulk discounts become too much, you can intervene and the information is all public, but in general bulk discounts plateau after a certain amount.
As to shipping. I think it's a valid case to examine if Amazon is subsidizing shipping
Amazon shipping is 1 cent to contracted driver (Score:2)
Amazon shipping is 1 cent to contracted driver that needs to have an full truck and do an 10 hour shift with no brakes and needs to bypass some safety laws just to make bank for the day
Re: (Score:2)
driver that needs to have... no brakes
The hyperbole is getting a little thick in here, Frenchie.
You're not going to park that tractor there... are you?
Re: (Score:2)
Having no brakes seems a bit dangerous.
Re: (Score:2)
Will this just not increase Amazon profits ? Amazon will still demand discounts from the publishers that smaller outlets cannot get.
I don't see how that would increase profits.
There needs to be a shark tax - one that is levied on the larger companies; protect the minnows lest the minnows get eaten by sharks. An easy idea but hard to legislate in a way that is fair.
Getting Amazon to pay any tax at all would be a good start.
Re: (Score:2)
That is just silly. There are already a ton of "shark taxes" just think about all the labor, safety, wage, and financial reporting rules that are exempted for companies with fewer than X employees or $Y revenue.
Reality is despite a lot more compliance overhead in many industries bigger business dominate because their superior efficiency over comes that overhead already. Independent bookstores are great example, they are legacy distribution model and whatever else they may offer or even be able to offer in t