Familiar sentiment

That last Amazon-related post was getting ungainly with the updates, and I did want to point to this excellent post at the Vromans bookstore blog:

“The benefit of having a rich, diverse ecosystem of vendors and suppliers has never been more obvious: many sources of information equals choice, and choice equals freedom. It’s actually your freedom that’s at stake here, and putting things back the way they were, fixing the notorious ‘glitch,’ won’t change that. Because your freedom was at stake long before this recent de-listing experiment. Anytime you limit yourself to fewer suppliers, especially of something as vital as information (and if you purchase a Kindle, you’re effectively doing just that, limiting yourself to a single information provider), you’re putting yourself at the mercy of that provider.”

2 Responses to Familiar sentiment

  1. Keath says:

    A thought has occurred to me regarding that line of thought – every supplier’s goal is to maximize revenue, so wouldn’t it be in their best interest to (a) carry the largest variety of product they can and (b) provide the simplest way to connect their product with potential buyers?

    Everyone jumps to the scare conclusion that “well, a sole supplier would cut choices and jack up the price,” but that seems to assume the buyer would be passive and still cough up the money. Is it too optimistic to think people would just stop buying if the conditions became too unfavorable (i.e. high prices, low selection)? No matter how much some people swear up and down their books are essential as food, I think for everyone it’s ultimately a recreational expense and thus scaled back (or cut out altogether) when conditions are bad. Wouldn’t a person just stop buying and start going to the library?

    Anyway, just thinking aloud here …

  2. Dr. Psycho says:

    Friend Vromans speaks to my condition.

%d bloggers like this: