Objectively, Amazon pays its authors fairly

What's wrong with Medimops?


the reason why I have such a long conversation in the first place
got involved with you was that it wasn't just about the
Booksellers (and their elitist doing and thinking) is about, but about
the reader, the book buyer. And they are hardly all elitist
Subjectivists and not a dying race either.

I didn't describe that either. you become to an eltarian clientele if they want to set objective standards in the world from their subjective world of experience with the transport medium “book”. At this point, the author and content of the book come in second or third place for this clientele and still they gossip about culture and education and all others who do not see it that way automatically assume that they are uneducated, suffer from a lack of culture and / or would read or own too few books etc. pp.

> 2. If books are sold off, this may be for the interested
> Customers be an incentive, but gives the impression of a lack of
> Value of the goods
> (hope I quoted you correctly in your sense, sabi)

I disagree: It doesn't matter to the content whether its packaging (e.g.) costs 1 cent or 100 euros. If there are inexpensive paperback editions - as described by sabi - and / or free lending from a media library and / or even lending from relatives, acquaintances, etc., the value of the content is not at all diminished. If only the content is copied (illegally) in lidder-like formats, the content even experiences a special appreciation - even if authors, publishers and dealers earn nothing.

I could give the transport medium “book” a value if it comes in gold leaf or if it is a rare antique. In most cases, however, it doesn't do that at all, and three times for bestsellers. At first it is only about bound paper. The value that you give to the content or author depends on the reader's own (sometimes very subjective) criteria. Even I will then assign a completely different (very high) priority or value to a book that I particularly like and (if I were a bookseller) never want to sell it off. Somebody else can see it very differently - and they probably will. for sale because for him no value.

I would like to get down to a rational view of the commodity “book”. As a retailer, I would simply separate the content and format from the transport medium more and, regardless of the content or its culture, would point out the possible quality of experience that one has with a paper book could. Touching, proud of ownership, hunters and gatherers who can afford the luxury of having, building, expanding and maintaining a library. What is so bad about it? Nothing ... absolutely nothing.

Of course, I'm not the benchmark and it's just my humble opinion, but then as a customer that seems more honest to me than when I get a “cultural complex” knocked around the ears, I as a customer also somehow get a rating (good reader , bad reader ...), which I actually know, everything collapses on closer inspection, because it contradicts the modern reading, lending and buying options, among other things. You can evaluate the latter as you like, but it is there and you have to deal with it as a bookseller.

Of course, the above is only an appealing advertisement on a subjective level, of course you can also argue against that, but you can hardly argue against it if you consciously address this type of subjective experience - without doing anything else with it Way compromised.

> It was once about medimops. Who only does what
> is possible.

That's the point! He only does what possible is. It's really just my guess, but I guess “he” has internalized (among other things) a very rational point of view.