The
Kindle DX launch might have sparked a wave of hype about the next generation of newspapers, but not everyone's so quick to agree: Dallas Morning News CEO James Moroney told a Senate subcommittee yesterday that the Kindle isn't a "platform that's going to save newspapers in the near term." According to Moroney, Amazon demands 70 percent of subscription revenue from newspapers, and further requires content owners to grant Amazon the right to republish content to other devices -- like, say,
the iPhone. That's a pretty inequitable split, and while we understand that Amazon has to pay for Whispernet somehow, it's hard to imagine newspaper publishers lining up to wager 70 percent of their digital subscription revenues and a perpetual license to their content on devices that are far from proven. On the other hand, it's innovate or die time for these guys, so we'll see what happens -- with all the
competitors out there poised to make a move, things are about to get interesting.
posted May 7th 2009 1:32PM
This is probably why The New York Times will only offer kindle distributions of its publication to those customers in areas where the paper isn't distributed in print! Seems like that competition from News Corp is just what Greedy Amazon needs.
You should see what Amazon's take is on book publishers. They have so much power that my royalties on my books are 1/6th that of through sales of other outlets.
Wow.. that sucks. It seems like you should be getting a bigger cut, or at least seeing more profit, with all the physical production and delivery out of the way.
Shoulda struck a deal with Google instead of complaining about Google. All you need to do is look at Google's contract for apps on Android.
I am astonished that Amazon can get away with charging 70%!!!!
But the lesson here is this. . . James MORONey SIGNED RIGHT UP at 70%. So who can blame Amazon with charging what the market will bare?
Call me whatever, but I have absolutely no interest in the Kindle or competing devices, I think they're a massive waste of money, and I would never pay more than $20 for something like this.
Wait, why are they talking to a Senate subcommittee? I don't understand? Are they going to bailout newspapers too? So we'll have a Federal newspaper now, huh? That sounds totally safe.
Maybe it also has something to do with Kerry's and I believe Specter's attempt to save the NYT by using government force. Can't let their mouthpieces in the press get run over, although the NYT needs to die. They've needed to die for a long time. No one will miss them. Bye bye NYT!
The sollution for newspapers seems pretty obvious to me.
The top 100 newspapers in the USA should pool their resources and develope their own e reader Kindle-a-like and sell it at cost to the customers or at least to subscribers. The huge numbers they do should bring the manufacturing/purchase cost down. Then they can stream their daily newspaper at an ultra low subscription fee that is subsidised by ads.
They don't have to pay ridiculous gateway fees to anyone then.
Has anyone seen the article about Murdoch wanting to charge people subscriptions and boasting the "free ride" is over.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/BUSINESS/05/07/murdoch.web.content/index.html#soundoff