Robert Bidinotto - Latest Comments

Re: Another Indie-Author Success Story

Karen Magill — Fri, 11 May 2012 13:54:04 -0000

I am trying to make sure that everyone I know sees it! LOL

Re: I’m Profiled on “The Thorum Underground”

RobertBidinotto — Fri, 11 May 2012 13:49:48 -0000

Thanks much, Tasha.

Re: Another Indie-Author Success Story

RobertBidinotto — Fri, 11 May 2012 13:49:24 -0000

I spotted that, too, Karen. Congrats!

Re: I’m Profiled on “The Thorum Underground”

Tasha — Fri, 11 May 2012 12:23:53 -0000

Congratulations.

Re: Another Indie-Author Success Story

Karen Magill — Wed, 02 May 2012 22:30:58 -0000

I must admit that I picked up a few copies of the Globe and Mail because I was mentioned in a sidebar in the print version.

Re: Another Indie-Author Success Story

RobertBidinotto — Wed, 02 May 2012 22:17:34 -0000

Thank you so much, Karen.

Re: Another Indie-Author Success Story

RobertBidinotto — Wed, 02 May 2012 22:17:20 -0000

Good for her! The Amazon imprints are highly selective in what work they take on, so Kris has every right to feel very proud.

Re: My Self-Publishing “Rocky” Story

RobertBidinotto — Wed, 02 May 2012 22:16:09 -0000

Thanks so much, Mike. It takes one to know one...or even to mistake somebody for one!

Re: Another Indie-Author Success Story

Cfyankovich — Wed, 02 May 2012 12:12:34 -0000

A friend of mine, Kris Tualla, is seeing success after two years of hard work. Her indie "Hansen" series has garnered her a print contract with the new Amazon SF wing. It is a great time to be an author!

Re: My Self-Publishing “Rocky” Story

MikeWhitacre — Tue, 01 May 2012 22:03:53 -0000

Good job, Robert! You're a gentleman, scholar, and an inspiration.

Re: Another Indie-Author Success Story

Karen Magill — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 10:20:08 -0000

It is a great article Robert.

Re: ANOTHER free ebook — two days only — from Claude Bouchard

Claude Bouchard — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 11:05:26 -0000

Robert, you are a true gentleman and scholar. Thanks, my friend. :)

Re: HUNTER sequel to put Luna in peril?

Gracie's mom — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 14:55:20 -0000

Luna needs to be safely at home, waiting for Hunter. Leave the kitty alone. I like her safe and sound. I am waiting impatiently for the next Hunter book though....

Re: Does Amazon Pose a Danger of “Monopoly” to the Book Business?

Lexi Dick — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 17:00:55 -0000

Thanks for explaining, Robert - I hadn't thought of that, and you are quite right. I think governments are far too interfering, too fond of spending our money which we would spend better ourselves, and should do the bare minimum. But they never will.

Re: Does Amazon Pose a Danger of “Monopoly” to the Book Business?

RobertBidinotto — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 11:27:06 -0000

From an essay by economist D.T. Armentano (worth reading in its entirety):

Let's go back to the Standard Oil "monopoly." Haven't we been taught that Standard Oil monopolized in restraint of trade? Isn't this the prime example that is provided in support of antitrust laws? The little-known truth is that when the government took Standard Oil to court in 1907, Standard Oil's market share had been declining for a decade. Far from being a "monopoly," Standard's share of petroleum refining was approximately 64% at the time of trial. Moreover, there were at least 147 other domestic oil-refining competitors in the market — and some of these were large, vertically integrated firms such as Texaco, Gulf Oil, and Sun. Kerosene outputs had expanded enormously (contrary to usual monopolistic conduct); and prices for kerosene had fallen from more than $2 per gallon in the early 1860s to approximately six cents per gallon at the time of the trial. So much for the myth of the Standard Oil "monopoly."

Should people be concerned about monopolies? Of course they should. But we must understand the true source and causes of monopolies — governmental barriers to free and open competition. The solution to the monopoly problem, then, lies not in antitrust laws (which should be repealed) but in the repeal of all governmental barriers to free and open trade.

Re: Does Amazon Pose a Danger of “Monopoly” to the Book Business?

RobertBidinotto — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 10:50:08 -0000

Hi, Lexi, and thanks for weighing in. Let me answer at length, for you and any others who share your concerns.

The difference between the examples you describe, and the ones that Konrath mentioned, is considerable. It's the distinction between what are called "public monopolies" and "private monopolies."

The ones you describe are (to the best of my understanding) "public monopolies" -- that is, companies whose monopoly status is either established or aided and abetted by the government. The Royal Mail is a perfect example, just as our U.S. Postal Service is here: government-chartered monopolies on the delivery of types of mail, in which a legal barrier to entry prevents competition. Nobody in the States is permitted to compete with the USPS in the delivery of typical letters -- First Class mail. And shielded behind the wall of law, such monopolies grow bloated, inefficient, indifferent to customer service and innovation, and thus grossly expensive. They can pass the inflated costs on to customers at will, because (a) there is no alternative for the service they provide, and (b) the government often steps in with subsidies to bail them out -- subsidies sucked from the pockets of the taxpayers. Other examples in U.S. history were the early railroads in the West, which received from the U.S. government monopoly charters to operate in certain regions, plus free grants of millions of acres of land.

A "private monopoly" is quite different. It achieves its status not through the aid of targeted government assistance and grants of monopoly charters (i.e., force of law), but through superior product innovation, customer service, and/or pricing. It simply out-competes its rivals to achieve dominance in an industry. That describes (at various times in their histories) the examples cited by Konrath, including companies like IBM, Apple, and Amazon.

Now, what could prevent such a company from becoming the proverbial Frankenstein monster -- using its dominant market share to prey on consumers, "price gouging" its customers and suppliers, and becoming fat, inefficient, and non-innovative?

In a truly free market, the answer is two-fold: potential competition, and the existence of substitutes.

As long as there are no legal barriers to entry, a "private monopoly" must operate with the worry that by jacking up prices, irritating customers, and becoming inefficient, they will be giving an engraved invitation to other investors to enter the market and build companies to undercut it. Potential competition exists not only over price, but also innovation: If a dominant company doesn't stay ahead of the curve of new invention, it will become prey to new upstart companies with new, more desirable products. Just ask IBM, or the American "Big Three" automakers. Standard Oil was considered the textbook example of the Evil 19th Century Monopolist -- a vertically integrated firm with a lock on over 80 percent of the marketplace in oil. But even that company couldn't prevent new oil discoveries in the Gulf of Mexico, which led to the rise of Gulf and Texaco.

And even if the demand for a particular product is relatively "inelastic," like oil, a private "monopolist" (or more likely, dominant firm) still faces the problem of substitute products. As the company jacks up prices, consumers respond by looking for other options -- and the high prices may make options that were once too expensive look much more attractive. If home heating oil prices go sky-high, people look to natural gas, heat pumps, even installing solar panels.

In short, there are limits to how high a private monopolist can jack up prices, fail to innovate, or otherwise poorly serve customers, before they will "vote with their dollars" for some other company or companies. That has been the history of the private business market.

These are all reasons to get government out of the marketplace. When governments favor some companies or industries over others, they create impediments to the competitive discipline of free markets. Governments should police the private use of actual coercion (threat of force) and fraud in the marketplace, but nothing else. They should neither be subsidizing companies nor giving them charters to monopolize products and services, because that is when "predatory pricing" and other evils are encouraged.

Konrath is right: The nightmare specter of a gigantic Amazon rapaciously screwing customers and authors alike is a fantasy. It won't happen, because in a truly free market, it can't. Countless competitors and potential competitors are poised and ready to pounce the minute Jeff Bezos begins to screw anybody (even assuming he wants to).

Let customers continue to "vote with their dollars" without interference, in effect democratically electing the products and services they want, and boosting the market shares of the companies that provide them, while simultaneously "throwing the bums out" by refusing to patronize uncompetitive companies. Customers know exactly what they want; their preferences, and not those of politicians, can and should rule and discipline the marketplace.

Re: Does Amazon Pose a Danger of “Monopoly” to the Book Business?

Lexi Dick — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 04:05:49 -0000

The Scott Turow piece is very silly, but Joe didn't totally carry me with him.

In the UK, companies that had/have a monopoly tend to be slow, inefficient and expensive. In the past, when you could only get a phone from the Post Office, it took up to two years in my part of London (yes, really). British Gas was just unbelievable. Six visits by different operatives to install a bit of gas piping in my workshop. And today, Royal Mail is expensive and can't seem to put post through the right letterboxes.

Lexi Revellian

Re: Interviews with Indies: Jennifer Chase — Criminal Profiler, Crime-Thriller Author

Jonas Saul — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 06:00:54 -0000

Great interview! Thank you for introducing me to Jennifer. Off to read her works...

Re: An Interview with Lee Child (Part 3 — Conclusion)

Lee Thompson — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 08:12:38 -0000

Awesome interview!

Re: Update on Vince Flynn’s health

Jmoffat125 — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:28:03 -0000

Vince,
I have read all of your novels
. What a great ride. I also have been fighting prostate. Keep up the good fight. Never give up and surround yourself with those who love you. I will pray for you daily.

Jack Moffat

Re: How to Succeed As a Self-Published Author

RobertBidinotto — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 02:20:08 -0000

Martin, somehow I missed this comment. I couldn't be more happy about your success -- especially since those are now PAID downloads for you, and you're on the Kindle bestseller list! Proof that these commonsense principle WORK, if writers who produce good work are diligent about practicing them. Congratulations!

Re: Interviews with Indies: Helen Hanson — Cyber-Thriller Author

Robert Ryland — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:59:22 -0000

Insightful interview. I'm always intrigued by the variety of backgrounds good writers have. It isn't necessary to have a Lit. degree or MFA to create well-crafted, compelling stories. In fact, it might be an advantage. All the best to you, Helen.

Re: How to Succeed As a Self-Published Author

Martin — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:01:04 -0000

Fantastic article, Robert. You helped me so much in our earlier email exchange. My novel, My Temporary Life is currently sitting at #2 on Amazon's top 100 FREE US Downloads, and I know that it wouldn't have happened without heeding your advice. Thanks for taking the time to help your fellow Indie authors.

Re: How to Succeed As a Self-Published Author

RobertBidinotto — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:08:49 -0000

Many thanks for the kind comment and well-wishing. Right back atcha!

Re: How to Succeed As a Self-Published Author

Croscon — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 17:15:18 -0000

Great article, well written & informative. Hopefully many authors with take it to heart & learn from it. Continued success