Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rnsmth who wrote (92871)	2/28/2010 12:41:09 PM
From: rnsmth	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213181

Related to the issue of paid content on devices Amazon frantically phoned publishers as Steve Jobs unveiled iPad By Kasper Jade Published: 12:00 PM EST Apple chief executive Steve Jobs was still standing on stage addressing an auditorium full of media reps last month when higher-ups at Amazon began phoning publishers in an effort to extract details on the deals they were given to supply content on the new iPad device he was touting. The move came as the online retailer and eBook reader pioneer was pressing its publisher partners to agree to long-term licensing deals that would guarantee Amazon Kindle owners would always be afforded the lowest possible price for content, in exchange for publishers seeing higher revenues from each sale, according to the New York Times. But as fate would have it, Jobs -- the so-called king of new media -- would use his leverage, and that of the iTunes Store's distribution model, to persuade many book publishers to price their most popular content for the iPad inline with that offered for the Kindle. As an added twist, those publishers -- including Macmillan, Hachette Book Group and HarperCollins -- agreed to price bestsellers between $12.99 and $14.99 for the iPad, then turned around and demanded the same structure from Amazon. This translated into a cost increase for Kindle bestsellers from their historical $9.99 fetching price, spurring a price war between the online retailer and book publishers. As it stands, a good percentage of Amazon's e-publishing contracts still reportedly operate on a month-to-month cycle, as those publishers are constantly seeking more flexibility to market their content. Meanwhile, the retailer's discussions with newspapers and magazine are said to be more complicated. According to the Times, this group of publishers now finds itself torn between the allure of offering more advance, full-color, and media rich content on the iPad with the prospect of losing existing subscribers to the Kindle's black-and-white E-Ink medium. "[So], to avoid losing their current subscribers on the Kindle, some publishers are considering signing the new Amazon contract now and offering a free, limited application for their content on the iPad," the newspaper reported. "At a later date, when an Amazon product can display richer types of media, publishers could release a paid product that looks and works the same across multiple devices." The move is said by one unnamed publishing executive to exhibit all the signs of an ensuing price war for digital print content that could extend for years on end. appleinsider.com

To: rnsmth who wrote (92871)	2/28/2010 12:47:26 PM
From: sylvester80	Respond to of 213181

duplicate... SI hickup...

To: rnsmth who wrote (92871)	2/28/2010 12:47:27 PM
From: sylvester80	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 213181

The paradigm shift IMO will be in that online ads will pay for our mobile phones AND our free monthly service internet access. That is where we are heading IMO. That's the paradigm shift. Now if you are the person who wants to pay and not see ads, then I'm sure there will also be a pay model to buy your handset and buy your data access. But once the free model is available, more and more people will opt for that IMO.

To: rnsmth who wrote (92871)	2/28/2010 3:30:49 PM
From: Doren	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213181

micropayments Why do I think that micropayment would quickly become minipayments then payments then gouge...??? It remains to be seen whether news can be charged for. When the NY Times starts charging me I'll switch to Reuters. I used to read Reuters but their site got really bad. Now it's better. The NY Times site has now become worse and they want to charge. I can always switch over to the LA Times or the BBC. It's a can of worms for them. And of course (OT) it used to be that we believed a well informed public was essential to our security, hence the 3 TV stations had to have news (even if it lost money) to get their license. Personally I dread a society where information is only available for those with money.