Technology

Further Thoughts on E-Publishing And Missing Out

by

Serdar brought up the point that in a way, publishers brought the Amazon mess on themselves because they resisted e-book technology. I think he had a brilliant insight, and want to expand on it further.

Let’s take a look at the whole Kindle idea. In many ways it’s a bare-bones thing (at least before the Tablet), a black-and-white-display (however with cool e-Ink), simple delivery, basic formatting. The Kindle is impressive as a unified system, but except for that e-ink, it doesn’t seem that innovative, from file format to the menu

But what Amazon did is string the links together in a chain that worked. They pushed it, they stuck buy it, they evolved it. I myself used to think the Kindle sounded ridiculous, now I own one. The Nook sounded like a runner-up, and now I not only hear great things, I have a friend who can’t put her’s down.

The iPad? Yeah.  Some issues but the big lawsuit shows Apple was big enough to talk with . . .

Of course each “link” chain should be obvious, but the Publishers didn’t  follow that.

All those publishers had money. They had technology. They had allies in book chains. They had people talking about eBooks and playing with formats.

They didn’t do anything. They left it to Amazon and Apple and Barnes and Noble. The Publishers avoided or dodged, didn’t take risks, and by and large let everyone else into the mobile space.

An alliance of publishers could have rallied around ePub. It could have backed a new device. It could have done all sorts of things. It didn’t exist and it didn’t happen.

Now what? I’ve launched books on my own, and the only reason to have a publisher is the marketing advantage (and there’s several small and mids for that). So many are exploring e-books. EVERYONE has to be on Kindle, and B&N is coming from behind (which I need to address in my own books).

It’s going to get wild, isn’t it?  Maybe people thinking of working for traditional publishing need to be thinking outside the box . . .

– Steven Savage

Best Buy CEO Resigns. Now what?

by

In case you were too busy posting pictures on Instabook or Facetagram, the CEO of Best Buy has resigned. This caused a lot of discussion and some weird stock fluctuations.

Bruce Upbin at Forbes says he felt Dunn had to quit, citing the famous Downes article on why Best Buy was going out of business.

My take?

  • The departure of CEO Dunn indicates that Best Buy plans to keep making massive shifts and is at least vaguely aware they have to. We haven’t seen it all yet.
  • Dunn’s background is telling. He literally worked his way up from sales associate in 1985 to CEO. He’s experienced – but also he may have been tragically old-school. Wether he can’t move with the times or his replacement is symbolic . . . his replacement is symbolic if you get my drift.
  • Best Buy is going to be fighting public opinion here since their challenges, cuts, and now this make them look quaintly old-school. This could be another case of a tarnished brand – and that’s a challenge they’ll have to overcome.
  • Best Buy’s challengers are many – sure there’s Amazon and Apple, but they were – and are – being nickeled and dimmed by others. Streaming replaces DVDs, DLC replaces in-store game purchases, Target is expanding to be an everything store, and you can still get your fancy appliances at a number of different places. There is, simply, no reason for Best Buy to exist as a unique entity.
  • The kiosk-like approach to stores may be viable, however. If they can leverage a few big warehouse stores and a lot of “starlets,” get some brand awareness, and find the right niches/services they may make it.
  • That being said, I see one advantage they may have being service, and it hasn’t been too impressive.
  • I still wonder what they can do in the age of vending machines for tech. I just don’t see them taking advantage of that.

In the end, I’ve got a gut feel that Best Buy is going to fade away in a Radio Shack like way. I can see a way out, but until I see what Dunn’s replacement does, I’m not going to count on it.

Now, ask what happens if they fade into obscurity. Who’s going to get blamed? Who will others target? Who will step into their place?

– Steven Savage

Facebook Buys Instagram

by

Unless the rock you’re living under lacks the internet (unless your destiny is a rock), you’ve heard that Instagram was bought by Facebook.

I’m trying to figure out the point of this really.  Some are worried that Instagram may stop being multi-network capable, but that issue’s already been addressed.  At the same time, it does give Facebook enhancements to it’s photo sharing capacity, and maybe they figure it can’t hurt to branch out beyond themselves.

But $1 billion?  I don’t know.  I look for any input from you guys out there, because I’m stumped.

– Steven Savage