Author Topic: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits, Amazon Taking Action (MERGED)  (Read 151265 times)  

Offline Amanda M. Lee

  • Status: Edgar Allan Poe-10016
  • *******
  • Posts: 6004
  • Gender: Female
  • Listen to me, you will.
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
« Reply #675 on: June 22, 2018, 08:46:55 am »
The second one is for you to relax away from talking about regulating other genre's until their is a problem.
This is a problem in multiple other genres. Romance is definitely the hardest hit. It's hardly the only genre hit, though. Instituting one group of rules for one genre and ignoring the others makes no sense. These should be across-the-board rules. In truth, 750 KENPC is low for some fantasy. 1,000 KENPC is probably better. Then omnibuses, anthologies, boxed sets, etc. should be banned to cut down on abuse. A title can be in KU once. Period. Institute those two things and most of the scammers couldn't afford to stay.

Amanda M. Lee

KBoards.com

  • Advertisement
  • ***

    Offline RPatton

    • Status: Jane Austen-10011
    • ***
    • Posts: 340
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #676 on: June 22, 2018, 09:31:59 am »
    So, I just want to say that there's a huge part of me jumping for joy because the discussion has turned away from "You're either with us or against us" and is back to the valid points that not only should be discussed, but have a relatively decent chance of helping things.

    However, this doesn't include behavior and acts happening off of a retailer's site. Bad acts should be called out regardless of who is doing the bad act. It's really not an us or them issue. It's a sustainability issue. And every time someone behaves unprofessionally, it makes it that much more difficult for those behaving professionally to be taken seriously.

    I'm going to deliver a dose of realism and it's going to be painful. Correlation is not Causation. Chance probably wasn't removed from the Amazon storefront because of stuffing or compilations or crappy formatting. He was likely removed because he involved Amazon in what amounted to an illegal lottery. That it happened the same time as the 10% bonus rule is correlation, not causation. Do not think of his removal as a "win" because I am fairly certain, in that I would wager my entire back catalog and future catalog on the belief that Amazon didn't remove him for any of the reasons people would like to believe they did. And I get why they want to believe that. It's validation, but it's validation based on a false premise.

    Second does of reality, and this one is even more painful. None of us has the connections to actually effect change. You need to be on a first name basis with senior executives. You need to know their kids' birthdays and they need to know your kids' favorite activities. A rep at KDP isn't a connection, it's a contact. And they just don't have the political power of good-will to be able to say, "Hey, this is the way we're going to do this from now on." It would be nice if we did, but this is going to be someone who has been part of the publishing industry for decades, and not as an author, but as an editor at the Big 5 who's transitioned to being an agent or has stepped into the indie sphere. They have the ability to make a few calls and get the ear of someone who will listen.

    Third painful reminder of reality, Amazon isn't against compilations, bonus content, or box sets. They just want it advertised as what it is and they won't count those books towards an all-star bonus. You are never going to get them removed from the store, because Amazon doesn't mind them. What they mind is readers not getting what they expect. If they expect a book full of 15 different novels, fine. If they expect a single novel, they shouldn't get 14 more novels. Truth in advertising. Don't do a bait & switch and Amazon is happy.

    And finally, the fourth dose of reality. Let's say that there's a page cap for Romance. In theory it's nice. In practice not some much. Women's fiction will get hit with all the romances and miscatting will be a huge problem. If there's a punishment for being in romance (the page cap), but none elsewhere, then people are going to go where there isn't a punishment.

    In the interest of not just pointing out the problems or issues, but offering suggestions...

    You don't need to install a page cap. You need to install a max payout. Have it cap out at 3.49. Regardless of how many pages, the most an author can get paid is 3.49. This is what a book at 4.99 would earn. There is absolutely no incentive to add extra pages for the extra payout and while authors writing longer books might feel a bit of a pinch, 4.99 seems to be the highest price point with a larger number of authors. Yes, people price at 5.99 and higher, but not as much.

    The carrot of maxing out KENPC is gone.

    This doesn't solve the actions outside of retailers, but this would at least remove some of the reason for pumping a single book full of additional content.

    I'd also like to see borrows count for less in the ranking or even better, create a separate ranking for bought and borrowed (and if a book is in KU it could be in both). But that's pretty much a pipe dream and Select author would lose their collective poop. :)
    « Last Edit: June 22, 2018, 10:22:32 am by RPatton »

    Offline OnlyTheGrotesqueKnow

    • Status: Lewis Carroll-10005
    • **
    • Posts: 136
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #677 on: June 22, 2018, 09:42:20 am »
    This is a problem in multiple other genres. Romance is definitely the hardest hit. It's hardly the only genre hit, though. Instituting one group of rules for one genre and ignoring the others makes no sense. These should be across-the-board rules. In truth, 750 KENPC is low for some fantasy. 1,000 KENPC is probably better. Then omnibuses, anthologies, boxed sets, etc. should be banned to cut down on abuse. A title can be in KU once. Period. Institute those two things and most of the scammers couldn't afford to stay.

    And this is where you lose people. A 1,000 KEN PC comes out to about a 200,000 word count. None of my books would qualify. If I can't publish what I want, why would I support you? Your cap is about 560 pages in trade paperback. While that would be long in some genres my top 10 books all go above that mark.

    Wheel Of Time
    Game of Thrones
    The Last Four Harry Potter Books
    Black Jewels Trilogy

    I went to Amazon and went to Fantasy. Not the top 100 but just Fantasy and almost every book was over the cap. My search was only mine. But I recognized Brandon Sanderson, and a few titles I'd been looking at. While the Top 100 are owned by the under 500 page count. Only 6 were boxed sets... Out of a 100. All of them are series I've seen people talk about and all of them have reviews. If this is an issue in the genre, I'm not seeing it.

    This is nuanced. But creating a cap that would make it hard for my favorite books to be published can't be good and won't make for a better system. Are you willing to tell authors they can't write the stories they want? Because you think they are too big? So that you can fix a problem they don't see in their genre? You will be gutting some genre's, I know because I read them. Authors will simply not write in them and those authors that suffer through it will turn their back on this discussion and you.

    You can't ask for help while saying you don't care. Either its a partnership with respect where we face the world together or its every writer for themselves.
    To be broken is to be singularly beautiful. Only the shattered are unique in a world of plastic. Scars are the tribal marks of the forgotten, they are how we know our own.

    Offline PearlEarringLady

    • Status: Dostoevsky-10015
    • ******
    • Posts: 3171
    • Gender: Female
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #678 on: June 22, 2018, 09:55:40 am »
    I like the idea of a payment cap better than a page cap. You can still write long but most people who do aren't pricing that much more. I'm happy to take the money, but I never understood paying authors more than what they would make based on how they priced their books.

    I like this idea, too, but it makes my head spin trying to marry the price-per-unit of a sale with the price-per-page of a borrowed book, especially when the price-per-page is only worked out weeks after it's registered. Not to mention that half the books in KU would be priced at 99.99.  :D So I don't think this one will fly.

    Offline Used To Be BH

    • Status: Dostoevsky-10015
    • ******
    • Posts: 3694
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #679 on: June 22, 2018, 10:08:49 am »
    In the interest of not just pointing out the problems or issues, but offering suggestions...

    You don't need to install a page cap. You need to install a max payout. Have it cap out at 3.49. Regardless of how many pages, the most an author can get paid is 3.49. This is what a book at 4.99 would earn. There is absolutely no incentive to add extra pages for the extra payout and while authors writing longer books might feel a bit of a pinch, 4.99 seems to be the highest price point with a larger number of authors. Yes, people price at 5.99 and higher, but not as much.

    The carrot of making out KENPC is gone.

    This doesn't solve the actions outside of retailers, but this would at least remove some of the reason for pumping a single book full of additional content.

    I'd also like to see borrows count for less in the ranking or even better, create a separate ranking for bought and borrowed (and if a book is in KU it could be in both). But that's pretty much a pipe dream and Select author would lose their collective poop. :)
    The maximum payout idea has a lot of merit. At the very least, click farms and bots would have to work a lot harder. The only reason stuffing started in the first place must be that it's a more efficient use of scamming resources to get a $13 payout on one long book that to have to do almost four reads of shorter books to get the same effect. Writers with longer books (above 750 KENP) will lose some of their borrow money, though the payout you propose is higher than what people got under KU 1, and getting rid of the scammers might be worth it, even financially. Moving to a healthier ecosystem will in the long run attract more readers, and at minimum the program will be at less risk of collapsing.

    The key selling point for Amazon would that it would be much easier to enforce than some ideas we've seen. That means it might actually happen.

    I'm not sure all Select writers would be upset if there were a separate ranking for borrowed books--I wouldn't be if it solved a problem. Amazon, however, would have a problem with it. KU is the only really compelling thing Select has to offer. (Notice how many people in these threads say KU when they mean Select.) If KU books lost some or all of the visibility they get from borrows, I'd imagine that could lead to an exodus from Select. However, if other changes reduced or eliminated scamming, the ranking bump would no longer be as much of an issue. If one thinks of the rankings as a measure of audience size, rather than sales, there's really nothing wrong with a borrow counting the way a sale does. We worry about it because click farms and bots can game borrows. Sales aren't as easy to manipulate, except for incentivized buying or the quick buy-and-return (because returns don't affect ranking).
    I have not consented to the new Terms of Service, which were implemented without any announcement and without the ability to accept or reject them. My continued participation on the forum is related only to addressing this issue and cannot be construed as implied consent.  9/19/2018

    Offline Used To Be BH

    • Status: Dostoevsky-10015
    • ******
    • Posts: 3694
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #680 on: June 22, 2018, 10:11:22 am »
    I like this idea, too, but it makes my head spin trying to marry the price-per-unit of a sale with the price-per-page of a borrowed book, especially when the price-per-page is only worked out weeks after it's registered. Not to mention that half the books in KU would be priced at 99.99.  :D So I don't think this one will fly.
    I agree, but RPatton's original suggestion was not to cap the borrow at the same as the royalty for a read. It was to have flat $3.49 cap on the assumption that most indie books aren't priced more than $4.99. A floating cap based on retail price could be a nightmare.
    I have not consented to the new Terms of Service, which were implemented without any announcement and without the ability to accept or reject them. My continued participation on the forum is related only to addressing this issue and cannot be construed as implied consent.  9/19/2018

    Offline RPatton

    • Status: Jane Austen-10011
    • ***
    • Posts: 340
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #681 on: June 22, 2018, 10:20:21 am »
    I like this idea, too, but it makes my head spin trying to marry the price-per-unit of a sale with the price-per-page of a borrowed book, especially when the price-per-page is only worked out weeks after it's registered. Not to mention that half the books in KU would be priced at 99.99.  :D So I don't think this one will fly.

    It's not based on what they are listed at. It's a hard cap of 3.49. No matter if the book is listed at .99 or 9.99, it can never earn more than 3.49 from page reads. It can earn less though. so a book at 1000 KENPC would earn the page rate per page read, up to 3.49. If someone only reads 20 pages, then an author earns 20 page reads. If someone reads all 1000 pages, the author earns 3.49. If someone reads 900, the author earns 3.49. Amazon knows the borrows and the page reads from borrows.

    Whether or not it could be practically implemented is another thing. It's basically a hybrid approach to KU 1 and KU 2. Count page reads until the amount hits 3.49, at which point, that's when page reads don't matter. Of course, that causes a problem with all-stars.

    However, this has an indirect benefit. With the cap on what a book could earn from a single reader, the benefit from inflating a book's page reads goes away because it no longer can subsidize the inflated ad spends. Without the inflated ad spends to push everyone out of the front page of the top 100, the cost-benefit ratio to underpricing a book. So without the swath of .99 books inflated with additional content, the all-stars threshold would naturally sink. Although it will naturally sink now that compilations and box sets don't count towards all-stars.

    Okay, beautiful minding it right now.

    Two-pronged. First prong, Amazon already implemented. Compilations and Box sets won't count towards All-stars. So you can put them out, but there's no chance of getting a bonus from them.

    Second prong, put a hard cap on what a book can earn, not a flat rate though. So a book still earns per page read, but there's a hard cap at 3.49, which is close to what Amazon pays for a book priced at 4.99. So, even if a book gets inflated, the page reads will never be able to offset the cost of marketing a book with the intent of pushing everyone else out of the marketplace. (If you take a look at Romance as a case-study, this is what happened. Inflated pages subsidized inflated ad spends so that others couldn't afford to advertise, leaving the first pages of the top 100 of romance filled with the books whose authors/publishers spent large amounts of money advertising.)

    By removing the two keystones (all books could count towards All-stars, whether compilations or single titles and maxing KENPC to subsidize increased add spends), people will have to work a lot harder to manipulate the system. Not that they still can't, but it's more work.

    Offline David VanDyke

    • Status: Arthur C Clarke-10014
    • *****
    • Posts: 2472
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #682 on: June 22, 2018, 10:22:12 am »
    Any cap would be useful, whether by pages or payout. The 3000 cap was useful. A payout cap at the equivalent of a 9.99 retail sale (about 6.99) would be useful, cutting in half the $13-14 possible under the current system, while hitting (I bet) almost no indies at all (who prices an ebook above $20?). The tradpubs get different terms anyway.

    Again, even a slightly lower cap would be welcome.

    There's a sweet spot somewhere.  can't believe all these quants at Amazon haven't thought of testing out different caps to find it.
    « Last Edit: June 22, 2018, 10:29:03 am by David VanDyke »

    Offline PhoenixS

    • Status: A A Milne-10008
    • ******
    • Posts: 4279
    • Gender: Female
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #683 on: June 22, 2018, 10:27:53 am »
    Considering the reps I've spoken to or met in person, this is 100% true. Many struggle to understand the issues at all and defer to others. You might have a faster response going through a rep than through the KDP dashboard contact page, but that's about it.

    KDP employees trawl this board. We've seen action taken against specific people and practices when they were called out here when no action was taken despite the same evidence being sent through the "proper" channels.

    Amazon "does" listen, despite how infuriating their inconsistency in acting might be. So speaking out here is often a good way to bring attention to issues and for Amazon to gauge reactions to proposed suggestions and solutions.

    Just sayin' ...
    Comments removed to protect content and data from the over-reaching TOS of new forum owner VerticalScope. VerticalScope claims rights to any content posted to this site as theirs to disseminate beyond this site in any way they see fit.

    KBoards was purchased by VerticalScope 7.5 years and 4000 posts after I joined. VerticalScope will not allow that existing content to be permanently deleted, despite the fact I did not and do not agree to granting the new owners the rights to my content. - September 21, 2018

    Offline Crime fighters

    • Status: Scheherazade-10012
    • *****
    • Posts: 1573
    • Ohio
    • Something in the way
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #684 on: June 22, 2018, 10:29:29 am »
    Isn't a page cap and payout cap the same thing? That being said, I think a payout cap would 'read' better in terms of PR, and would halt any confusion. For example, when a page cap is talked about, there seems to be confusion about what that would mean. Nobody would be advocating to ban books from KU that are longer, they just wouldn't get paid past a certain point.

    Any way you cut it, $3.49 is still a lot of money to earn for something that's nothing more than a borrow from a lobrary.

    Offline EthanRussellErway

    • Status: Arthur Conan Doyle-10007
    • ****
    • Posts: 514
    • Gender: Male
    • Dewey, Arizona
      • View Profile
      • Ethan Russell Erway
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #685 on: June 22, 2018, 10:29:52 am »
    I like it. A rising tide lifts all ships.

    Online Crystal_

    • Status: Dostoevsky-10015
    • ******
    • Posts: 3184
    • Gender: Female
    • Portland, OR
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #686 on: June 22, 2018, 10:48:43 am »
    I'm going to deliver a dose of realism and it's going to be painful. Correlation is not Causation. Chance probably wasn't removed from the Amazon storefront because of stuffing or compilations or crappy formatting. He was likely removed because he involved Amazon in what amounted to an illegal lottery. That it happened the same time as the 10% bonus rule is correlation, not causation. Do not think of his removal as a "win" because I am fairly certain, in that I would wager my entire back catalog and future catalog on the belief that Amazon didn't remove him for any of the reasons people would like to believe they did. And I get why they want to believe that. It's validation, but it's validation based on a false premise.

    Most everyone I've discussed CC with agrees his books were removed because of the lottery. But I still see that as a win, because that is the kind of behavior that hurts all authors. An illegal lottery opens Amazon up to legal trouble. If that kind of things continues to happen, Amazon might decide KDP isn't worth the effort, or that authors can't be trusted with current restrictions and tighten the publication process.

    It's a win solely because unethical and illegal behavior should be removed from the store. And it's a win because it shows Amazon can actually enforce its rules. And it's a win because it stops a behavior that hurts the industry.

    I dislike Chance. I dislike his persona and find his tactics unethical. He's done a lot to screw up romance and he is a spammer (as in he breaks SPAM laws all the time). But that isn't why I was happy to see his books removed.

    Second does of reality, and this one is even more painful. None of us has the connections to actually effect change. You need to be on a first name basis with senior executives. You need to know their kids' birthdays and they need to know your kids' favorite activities. A rep at KDP isn't a connection, it's a contact. And they just don't have the political power of good-will to be able to say, "Hey, this is the way we're going to do this from now on." It would be nice if we did, but this is going to be someone who has been part of the publishing industry for decades, and not as an author, but as an editor at the Big 5 who's transitioned to being an agent or has stepped into the indie sphere. They have the ability to make a few calls and get the ear of someone who will listen.

    Most of us don't have sway as individuals. But reaching out to reps about issues does help push things along. We do have power as a group.

    Personally, I don't see a need for a cap if the bonus content rules are enforced (and compilations really do need to be carefully and clearly labeled). When I spoke to a rep, he gave me a hard no on the idea of a cap or the idea of removing box sets from the store. So I don't expect that to happen. But you never know.

    Offline MmmmmPie

    • Status: Lewis Carroll-10005
    • **
    • Posts: 228
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #687 on: June 22, 2018, 11:39:49 am »
    When I spoke to a rep, he gave me a hard no on the idea of a cap or the idea of removing box sets from the store. So I don't expect that to happen. But you never know.

    Just a point of clarification... I don't believe anyone has seriously advocated for removing box sets from the store, but rather making them ineligible for Kindle Unlimited. As far as the page cap, I think the idea is to limit the number of KU pages they could be paid for.  When you talked with the rep, do you know if he/she meant a hard no on no box sets in the whole store, or rather in the kindle unlimited program?

    This, I think, is where the idea of a dollar-limit per borrow has a lot of merit. My first choice would be to limit the amount per borrow to the amount the author would earn on a buy -- simply because the current system makes no sense and results in a seriously skewed market. But I'd definitely be receptive to a dollar-cap, because anything that discourages the scamming and stuffing is a step in the right direction.

    Online Crystal_

    • Status: Dostoevsky-10015
    • ******
    • Posts: 3184
    • Gender: Female
    • Portland, OR
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #688 on: June 22, 2018, 11:56:20 am »
    Just a point of clarification... I don't believe anyone has seriously advocated for removing box sets from the store, but rather making them ineligible for Kindle Unlimited. As far as the page cap, I think the idea is to limit the number of KU pages they could be paid for.  When you talked with the rep, do you know if he/she meant a hard no on no box sets in the whole store, or rather in the kindle unlimited program?

    This, I think, is where the idea of a dollar-limit per borrow has a lot of merit. My first choice would be to limit the amount per borrow to the amount the author would earn on a buy -- simply because the current system makes no sense and results in a seriously skewed market. But I'd definitely be receptive to a dollar-cap, because anything that discourages the scamming and stuffing is a step in the right direction.

    Oh, sorry, that's what I meant. The rep was very pro box sets in KU.

    If the choice is Amazon actually policing content or a cap, the former is so much better for authors. But if the choice is a cap or nothing, I'd much rather have a reasonable cap (something like the $6 or $7 David suggested).

    Offline Michaela Strong

    • Status: Dr. Seuss-10022
    • *
    • Posts: 19
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #689 on: June 22, 2018, 12:20:28 pm »
    I don't disagree with anything you've said, but you've said this twice now, and it's news to me. I may have missed an update or something, but I can't find where it says box sets aren't eligible for bonuses. It's certainly not on the bonus page I'm looking at.  Can you link or point me toward this info please?

    I believe it is multi-author box sets that don't qualify for individual bonuses.
    « Last Edit: June 22, 2018, 12:23:06 pm by Michaela Strong »

    Offline RPatton

    • Status: Jane Austen-10011
    • ***
    • Posts: 340
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #690 on: June 22, 2018, 01:02:18 pm »
    I don't disagree with anything you've said, but you've said this twice now, and it's news to me. I may have missed an update or something, but I can't find where it says box sets aren't eligible for bonuses. It's certainly not on the bonus page I'm looking at.  Can you link or point me toward this info please?

    It was in the first part of the announcement, if you don't comply you won't qualify for bonuses for June and going forward.

    I swore it included that books labeled as a compilation wouldn't qualify for the bonus, but I can't find my source. (I know I didn't make it up out of whole cloth, but it's totally possible that I misread it.) Still looking, but I am pretty sure not including compilations in the all-star bonus was part of the end goal.

    Offline Phxsundog

    • Status: Lewis Carroll-10005
    • **
    • Posts: 116
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #691 on: June 22, 2018, 01:23:56 pm »
    I'll add that it's extremely unclear what exactly Amazon thinks about re-titled collections or compilations. There are still plenty glutting up the Top 100, however authors are receiving compliance notices for collections labeled more clearly than the romance stuffers. There's a chance Amazon is refining policy internally or planning case-by-case actions against the abusive mega-stuffers in romance. However I don't feel 100% confident predicting anything right now.

    Offline Used To Be BH

    • Status: Dostoevsky-10015
    • ******
    • Posts: 3694
    • Gender: Male
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #692 on: June 22, 2018, 01:34:59 pm »
    My vote goes for a flat fee max, with a per page read minimum.

    Wait. I don't get a vote. Damn you Amazon.

    The only reason Amazon moved to the per page read payment instead of tweaked the per borrow rate anyway was to stop people from having access to borrow information. Otherwise, it would have been so easy to just set a sliding scale rate based on length and say a 25% rule (instead of 10%) to stop a lot of the people who were just publishing shorter books/stories for a quick payout. Instead, they went to all the trouble to put into place an entirely new way to pay, had to update so many old devices and put in so much development time just to find a way to count pages and even more when they realized their current methods were falling short... It's just impossible to deny. They did it ALL to get rid of people having those borrow numbers.

    I think it's insane that there hasn't been a payment cap put into place before now anyway. It's never made sense.
    You could well be right, but I don't understand Amazon's motivation in such a case. What difference does it make to Amazon whether we know our borrow numbers or not? There would actually be some advantage to Amazon if we did--then the borrows could be linked to AMS ads that generated them. Omitting that information causes the ads to appear to be performing worse than they are sometimes, and I don't see any upside for Amazon.
    I have not consented to the new Terms of Service, which were implemented without any announcement and without the ability to accept or reject them. My continued participation on the forum is related only to addressing this issue and cannot be construed as implied consent.  9/19/2018

    Offline RPatton

    • Status: Jane Austen-10011
    • ***
    • Posts: 340
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #693 on: June 22, 2018, 01:40:55 pm »
    You could well be right, but I don't understand Amazon's motivation in such a case. What difference does it make to Amazon whether we know our borrow numbers or not? There would actually be some advantage to Amazon if we did--then the borrows could be linked to AMS ads that generated them. Omitting that information causes the ads to appear to be performing worse than they are sometimes, and I don't see any upside for Amazon.

    Customer data is money. The more customer data externally available, the less valuable it becomes. Knowing the borrows made their data less valuable.

    Offline Amanda M. Lee

    • Status: Edgar Allan Poe-10016
    • *******
    • Posts: 6004
    • Gender: Female
    • Listen to me, you will.
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #694 on: June 22, 2018, 02:04:00 pm »
    It was in the first part of the announcement, if you don't comply you won't qualify for bonuses for June and going forward.

    I swore it included that books labeled as a compilation wouldn't qualify for the bonus, but I can't find my source. (I know I didn't make it up out of whole cloth, but it's totally possible that I misread it.) Still looking, but I am pretty sure not including compilations in the all-star bonus was part of the end goal.
    It didn't say anything about box sets, just bonus books.

    Amanda M. Lee

    Offline Jack Krenneck

    • Status: Arthur Conan Doyle-10007
    • ****
    • Posts: 1000
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #695 on: June 22, 2018, 02:22:26 pm »
    You don't need to install a page cap. You need to install a max payout. Have it cap out at 3.49. Regardless of how many pages, the most an author can get paid is 3.49. This is what a book at 4.99 would earn. There is absolutely no incentive to add extra pages for the extra payout and while authors writing longer books might feel a bit of a pinch, 4.99 seems to be the highest price point with a larger number of authors. Yes, people price at 5.99 and higher, but not as much.

    Obviously, a lot less people price above 4.99 than below it. But that doesn't mean that many, many people don't price above that threshold and would be hit hard by this suggestion. All of my boxed sets are at the 7.99/8.99 mark. Lots of other authors price similarly for a boxed set. Some price at 9.99. There are even authors with single books at 6.99. All of this is just in epic fantasy, one small slice of the store.

    The golden rule when solving problems is not to create other problems. Apart from the hit to authors such a low borrow payout would produce (a big enough problem in itself) what else could this trigger? KU already has a low pay out per page, this would probably force more and more authors wide. KU would have less books in it, especially from the top ranks of authors, and therefore consumers would find KU less appealing. This is not a situation amazon wants. And with less readers, income for borrows for all authors would probably drop, no matter the length of their books.

    Offline unkownwriter

    • Status: Emily Dickinson-10017
    • *******
    • Posts: 7599
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #696 on: June 22, 2018, 03:07:21 pm »
    Quote
    You don't need to install a page cap. You need to install a max payout.

    No, we had this in KUv1, and Amazon didn't like it, long form authors didn't like it, and now we have the ultimate black hat cheaters competition. Thanks, Amazon. There needs to be a page cap, beyond which no further money will be paid per borrow. I'd say 1K, but I can see where 750 would work.

    For a 1K KENPC book, paying out at .0045, that would be 4.50 per full read. Anyone who thinks that isn't enough needs to take a step back and look at what the current situation is doing to honest writers who are simply trying to earn some money. (I love how some excuse bad behavior as a writer trying to support his/her family.)

    Again:  This would in no way stop anyone from writing books as long as they want. It would only limit the payout per borrow in KU. No one has ever, never ever, said that anyone should not be able to write a book the length they want. Never. Ever.

    Offline caitlynlynch

    • Status: Dr. Seuss-10022
    • *
    • Posts: 40
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #697 on: June 22, 2018, 03:13:48 pm »
    Actually, I think the payout per borrow in KU should be capped at the same price the ebook is for sale for. Might actually stop the 99cent books glutting the market and get authors paid a fair rate for good work.

    Offline 101569

    • Status: Jane Austen-10011
    • ***
    • Posts: 484
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #698 on: June 22, 2018, 03:48:53 pm »
    Actually, I think the payout per borrow in KU should be capped at the same price the ebook is for sale for. Might actually stop the 99cent books glutting the market and get authors paid a fair rate for good work.

    The problem would be then people setting their book at $25+. Some trade pubs get in the teens. If there is no cap on price or payout then people are at the same place they are now.

    Offline Atlantisatheart

    • Status: Arthur Conan Doyle-10007
    • ****
    • Posts: 597
      • View Profile
    Re: Amazon Actions re NEW Bonus Content Limits -- threads MERGED
    « Reply #699 on: June 22, 2018, 04:41:54 pm »
    Let's get rid of the all-star bonus for a start, that takes away 25k worth of incentive, and any author hitting page numbers to get a bonus should be financially happy with what they are getting anyway. When the bonus programme was rolled out it said they may stop paying it in future - so stop.

    KBoards.com

    • Advertisement
    • ***