Here is the brief notice that reached this Kat's inbox (as well as the inbox of others) last week.
Book Depository platform. And why not; the choice of books was legion, and their prices were competitive, if not cheaper than the elephant in the room, Amazon. They provided free shipping with every book not subject to a minimum order or a yearly fee, but with every order, no matter where you were located.
Book Depository was a lifeline, a business that also nourished the hope that a reading culture based on maximum individual choice of books available on accessible terms could still hold its own. This was particularly so for those living in non-English speaking countries, where acquiring books can be daunting.
And then came the announcement, driven by Book Depository's corporate parent, none other than the on-line distribution behemoth from Seattle. But business is business, even if it involves closing an important channel for the distribution of books, and even though Amazon had at its founding pioneered the business of on-line book sales. So yesterday.
Book Depository was established in 2004, in Gloucester, England, by Stuart Felton and Andrew Crawford, the latter a former Amazon employee. Their mission was “selling ‘less of more’ rather than ‘more of less’”, with the goal of selling six million titles covering a wide range of book genres and topics, rather than merely best sellers.
This business model fit squarely within the notion of "the long tail", popularized by Chris Anderson, here, which was then all the rage. The idea was that, freed from the limitations of the physical shelf, on-line retailers could offer a much broader array of products. In terms of a statistical distribution, product choice was not limited to what is available at the central tendency (in the case of books, bestseller titles), but offer more obscure titles at the tails of the product distribution.
Book Depository early on was viewed as a rival of Amazon's on-line book business, and this Kat reveled in their services. Given their competitive position vis a vis Amazon, some eyebrows were raised when Amazon purchased Book Depository, reportedly on July 4, 2011 (in light of later events, the date portended Orwellian irony regarding the company's long-term freedom).
Was Amazon buying up a competitor to strengthen its dominant position in, at least, the UK book trade? This Kat does not recall any substantial claim that the acquisition posed a problem under competition law. Nor did this Kat find any reference to the claim that the acquisition was based on the notion of the target as a failing company.
In fact, in 2012 Book Depository was a finalist for the Fast Growth Business Awards' Retail/Leisure Business of the Year award, and it won two UK Startup Awards, Online Business of the Year and Retailer of the Year. Indeed, on the eve of the announcement to shutter the company, it is reported that Book Depository was selling 20 million books annually in more than 160 countries.
Amazon has been a company of few words when it comes to its communications regarding the imminent shuttering of Book Depository. Amazon's CEO Andy Jassy is reported to have sent a memo to Amazon in January, stating that “In November, we communicated the hard decision to eliminate a number of positions across our Devices and Books businesses [Merpel notices, this without mentioning Book Depository by name] businesses.” As far as this Kat has been able to determine, Amazon has not provided any further comment or information.
Permit this Kat to offer a few thoughts beyond the nuts and bolts of the story of the acquisition of a company that was on the fast track, only to ultimately falter in the face of current economic challenges and the business priorities of its corporate parent. Book distribution is not simply another business; it also goes to the heart of how knowledge and creativity flow through a society.
Books became societally interesting only after they could be mass produced, making them available to a broader population. The distribution of books was no less crucial than the means of copying and reproduction. With distribution came the Crown, which together with the Church first sought to regulate the book trade in the interest of control (the 16th and 17th centuries). Later, regulation was removed to serve the creative power of as many authors as possible (the 18th century onwards).
But even then, and controlling for the possibility of state censorship, the reach of books depended on market forces that treat the distribution of books like any other business commodity. Constraints on the scope of distribution could ensue, a by-product of the invisible hand.
Professor Neil Weinstock Netanel, in his influential article, "Copyright and a Democratic Civil Society", published in The Yale Law Journal in 1996, explained the stakes of getting copyright (including the broadest possible distribution of books) right in the interests of a robustly functioning democracy. Democracy and civil society were worthy goals for the copyright system 25 years ago and they are no less so today. The means by which books are distributed play a central role in achieving these goals.
And that is why the closing of Book Depository is of concern. Shuttering the company might impair the scope of book distribution, leading to potentially fewer books for sale in fewer countries and at a higher price. Perhaps entrepreneurial initiative will find alternatives for Book Depository, but perhaps not.
But I guess that is our problem, and not that of Amazon. Business is business.
Picture on upper right by Anomie, who has released it into the publkic domain.
Picture on bottom left is in the public domain.
We are sorry to let you know that Book Depository will be closing on 26 April 2023This Kat assumes that myriad readers, especially those outside of North America, who have sought to order a book online during the last two decades did so through the
You can still place orders until midday (12pm BST) on 26 April 2023 and we will continue to deliver your purchases and provide support for any order issues until 23 June 2023.
From all of us at Book Depository we want to say “thank you". Delivering your favourite reads to you since 2007 has been a pleasure.
Book Depository platform. And why not; the choice of books was legion, and their prices were competitive, if not cheaper than the elephant in the room, Amazon. They provided free shipping with every book not subject to a minimum order or a yearly fee, but with every order, no matter where you were located. Book Depository was a lifeline, a business that also nourished the hope that a reading culture based on maximum individual choice of books available on accessible terms could still hold its own. This was particularly so for those living in non-English speaking countries, where acquiring books can be daunting.
And then came the announcement, driven by Book Depository's corporate parent, none other than the on-line distribution behemoth from Seattle. But business is business, even if it involves closing an important channel for the distribution of books, and even though Amazon had at its founding pioneered the business of on-line book sales. So yesterday.
Book Depository was established in 2004, in Gloucester, England, by Stuart Felton and Andrew Crawford, the latter a former Amazon employee. Their mission was “selling ‘less of more’ rather than ‘more of less’”, with the goal of selling six million titles covering a wide range of book genres and topics, rather than merely best sellers.
This business model fit squarely within the notion of "the long tail", popularized by Chris Anderson, here, which was then all the rage. The idea was that, freed from the limitations of the physical shelf, on-line retailers could offer a much broader array of products. In terms of a statistical distribution, product choice was not limited to what is available at the central tendency (in the case of books, bestseller titles), but offer more obscure titles at the tails of the product distribution.
Book Depository early on was viewed as a rival of Amazon's on-line book business, and this Kat reveled in their services. Given their competitive position vis a vis Amazon, some eyebrows were raised when Amazon purchased Book Depository, reportedly on July 4, 2011 (in light of later events, the date portended Orwellian irony regarding the company's long-term freedom).
Was Amazon buying up a competitor to strengthen its dominant position in, at least, the UK book trade? This Kat does not recall any substantial claim that the acquisition posed a problem under competition law. Nor did this Kat find any reference to the claim that the acquisition was based on the notion of the target as a failing company.
In fact, in 2012 Book Depository was a finalist for the Fast Growth Business Awards' Retail/Leisure Business of the Year award, and it won two UK Startup Awards, Online Business of the Year and Retailer of the Year. Indeed, on the eve of the announcement to shutter the company, it is reported that Book Depository was selling 20 million books annually in more than 160 countries.
Amazon has been a company of few words when it comes to its communications regarding the imminent shuttering of Book Depository. Amazon's CEO Andy Jassy is reported to have sent a memo to Amazon in January, stating that “In November, we communicated the hard decision to eliminate a number of positions across our Devices and Books businesses [Merpel notices, this without mentioning Book Depository by name] businesses.” As far as this Kat has been able to determine, Amazon has not provided any further comment or information.
Permit this Kat to offer a few thoughts beyond the nuts and bolts of the story of the acquisition of a company that was on the fast track, only to ultimately falter in the face of current economic challenges and the business priorities of its corporate parent. Book distribution is not simply another business; it also goes to the heart of how knowledge and creativity flow through a society.
Books became societally interesting only after they could be mass produced, making them available to a broader population. The distribution of books was no less crucial than the means of copying and reproduction. With distribution came the Crown, which together with the Church first sought to regulate the book trade in the interest of control (the 16th and 17th centuries). Later, regulation was removed to serve the creative power of as many authors as possible (the 18th century onwards).
But even then, and controlling for the possibility of state censorship, the reach of books depended on market forces that treat the distribution of books like any other business commodity. Constraints on the scope of distribution could ensue, a by-product of the invisible hand.Professor Neil Weinstock Netanel, in his influential article, "Copyright and a Democratic Civil Society", published in The Yale Law Journal in 1996, explained the stakes of getting copyright (including the broadest possible distribution of books) right in the interests of a robustly functioning democracy. Democracy and civil society were worthy goals for the copyright system 25 years ago and they are no less so today. The means by which books are distributed play a central role in achieving these goals.
And that is why the closing of Book Depository is of concern. Shuttering the company might impair the scope of book distribution, leading to potentially fewer books for sale in fewer countries and at a higher price. Perhaps entrepreneurial initiative will find alternatives for Book Depository, but perhaps not.
But I guess that is our problem, and not that of Amazon. Business is business.
Picture on upper right by Anomie, who has released it into the publkic domain.
Picture on bottom left is in the public domain.
Lamenting the closure of Book Depository
Reviewed by Neil Wilkof
on
Tuesday, April 11, 2023
Rating:
Reviewed by Neil Wilkof
on
Tuesday, April 11, 2023
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn ![[Guest post] Can AI be considered a PHOSITA? Policy debates in the US and the EU](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggxDO6mW5r4n3-06Af5ckmIaMIhzgPJBoDP8AUsSYXY2zajUQt1ObGVn_GhCgidbG_YDVnybQuJ5XoAjjBG9Ws2xJWDQHNPMrLkn526SWIG371X_Kjt1E8tJmn8Ae_20Phyphenhyphen09JeuUOhhTR3aZE9lMRQlqHGQGcAWGxlo91rrKcLk0AfUjWCvw6RQ/s72-c/Two-cats-eating.jpg)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html