Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Audiblegate

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 362 posts

Re: Audiblegate

#221

Post by prepend »

axxl wrote: post #62
falcolas wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven’t dug into it too deeply myself, but here’s some numbers from late last year. Note that this as a producer sharing that 40% with the writer half and half (royalty share contract). One month saw 21 sales of a $19.99 audiobook. Amazon reported net sales of $76, so I made around $11. EDIT: looking closer, 17 of the sales occurred in a market/purchase combination that resulted in no royalties at all. The invoice…

Got it, so it seems like the contract is just heavily skewed in favor of Amazon, where the content is subsidizing all of the deals and discounts that Audible provides. Although how they can get a 0% royalty on certain sales in is baffling to me. > But it’s Audible. What choice is there? Yeah, they sadly seem to be lacking in meaningful competition. People on twitter are talking about libro.fm which has a slew of anti…

> Although how they can get a 0% royalty on certain sales in is baffling to me.

Wouldn’t this be a situation where they gave out promotional copies through free trials and stuff like that?

Re: Audiblegate

#222

Post by ohyoutravel »

parkingrift wrote: post #214

> As AB producers, we're supposed to get 40% if we host our AB exclusively in Audible, or 25% if we go 'wide' and use other retailers. This should be absolutely illegal.

People should be able to contract for whatever they want, provided it isn’t illegal. This doesn’t seem usurious or anything like that, what’s your particular objection?

Re: Audiblegate

#223

Post by prepend »

djrogers wrote: post #28
axxl wrote: post #11

The twitter thread and the accompanying website don't quite tell me what's going on besides 'not as much money as expected'. But I can't quite see what the 'Net Sales' problem is, it's just stated as "less money" for no reason? Although I am tired so maybe something just isn't clicking. I don't doubt that the terms of the deal are poor though. I had wondered for a while how the credit system worked, and if the increa…

> But again, I would buy a small fraction of the audiobooks I have purchased at full price. I’ve got ~300 audible books in my library, and I can safely say I’d have bought exactly none of them at full price.

Same here. The only time I’ve bought a book is when the price is less than $14.95.

The author seems disingenuous to propose that the retail price in audible is anything that anyone expects. I assume he’s not stupid and is aware of this so not bringing up this point is misleading.

It’s like if someone wrote a blog post enraged that BMG Record Club wasn’t paying them out a percent of retail prices without pointing out that BMG’s whole model was 10 CDs for a penny and then 2 for the price of one (or whatever the ridiculous price scheme was).

Re: Audiblegate

#224

Post by prepend »

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #137
napsterbr wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, why does it take 5-12 hours to record one finished hour?

You just don't have to read it out loud. You to read it at an even pace, have to enunciate properly, have to decide what words to emphasize in every sentence or how you change your tone etc. Getting this right for every paragraph will usually take multiple takes. Then there is additional audio editing and what not. Just for reference, as a prof, just creating a 30 min video that students can watch on their own time,…

When I make my video lectures for my class it takes about two hours for every one hour of video. That includes writing a transcript, edits, re-recording parts, posting, and even the encoding.

Obviously this will vary per person but I’m not very good at videos and that’s how long it takes.

I don’t get paid for videos it’s just part of my course. If I was a professional video maker, I think it would take me much less time.

But if someone is really slow at a task, perhaps it’s not economical for them to do that task.

I’m an amazing car washer. I wash a car like no other. But I take three hours and no one will pay my hourly rate. That doesn’t mean that my employer who pays me by the wash is bad, it means I shouldn’t wash cars for them.

Re: Audiblegate

#225

Post by rjtavares »

conor_f wrote: post #209
cassiogo wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any audible alternatives to suggest?

I don't personally listen to audio books, so hopefully someone can chime in with some helpful alternatives? From a quick search though, it looks like https://libro.fm/ is where I would start looking with an Audible alternative as it seems to align with my ideals and has a decent selection. There does seem to be a good few options though so have a look yourself if nobody has further suggestions :)

Apparently doesn't work outside the US/Canada:

> You appear to be accessing the site from outside the United States or Canada. While a credit card from the USA/Canada is required to purchase a monthly membership, it is possible to buy a gift membership from anywhere in the world.

It's incredible how far behind the Audiobook world is from Podcasting.

The only company trying something different is Pushkin. I think that may be the start of a Audiobook revolution.

Re: Audiblegate

#226

Post by Aachen »

mcgin wrote: post #179

Is there a viable alternative to Audible out there?

The author mentioned, and the only one I know of, is buying directly from the publishers.

Problem is: those are ridiculously expensive, like 35 euros for a single audio book that I don't even know if I'll like the contents because you can't browse it. Physical books are usually 15 euros and then you have unit and shipping costs. Somehow the publisher is fine putting it on audible (where I pay €10) and getting a few percent of that, but not fine if I pay "only" 10 euros when buying from them directly?

No idea about the logic here. I'd also be fine to pay 15 or so, matching the physical book, bit of a premium not to have to enrich Amazon. But 35 as only alternative to 10? Yeah no.

Edit: thought I should back this up with numbers. The first book that came to mind was Ready Player 2, I didn't cherry pick here it's literally the very first that I thought of and checked. Amazon ranked way higher than the official site but I got there via the author's Wikipedia page. From there there are links to three stores: one sells just the paper version, two stores both sell

- The paper book for $13

- The audio CDs for $44

- It's available on Audible.de for €10

This author (publisher?) is clearly not interested in getting sales via means other than Audible and must be happy with their €1.30 that the author says they get for non-exclusivity, or even if "audiblegate" is fake and they get the "full" 25%, that's still €2.50 instead of $44.

It's the same with Steam. I don't play new games that often, but when I do, I look to buy directly from the authors, DRM-free, the whole jazz. Often it's simply not possible and the only purchase option is via Steam. Next thing I hear is my game dev friend complaining about Steam dominance. I'm trying, but they need to make it possible at all... (Or in audio books' case, make it somewhat reasonable)

Re: Audiblegate

#227

Post by reddog »

He lost me at the start by complaining about Audibles listener friendly return policy. How is the producer "shouldering the cost" when I return their crappy, overwritten, poorly narrated audible book for credit?

Re: Audiblegate

#228

Post by toqy »

selfhoster11 wrote: post #211
conor_f wrote: post #197

Can everyone please just stop using Amazon products already? I'm sick of hearing people complain about them and still say "but they're too convenient" or "I've no other option!". You do. Stop using Amazon and related products. Tell everyone you can to stop using Amazon and related products.

Point me to an Audible alternative that has remotely as good selection and pricing in the UK, and I'll have a look at it. I don't like the subscription model and wish there was an alternative.

I’m a fan of the subscription model just because I can get books that are normally a lot more expensive than a credit with a single credit. And if there’s any cheaper books I can just buy them for cash.

Re: Audiblegate

#229

Post by mabbo »

ALittleLight wrote: post #27

I worked on a tool at Amazon once that incorrectly calculated royalties, not because Amazon was greedily trying to steal from publishers, but just because of general incompetence (or, lack of sufficient competence maybe). Basically, of the people who wrote the tool, tested the tool, and used the tool, none of them knew exactly how royalties should be calculated and none of them could tell whether or not they were bei…

But this goes to the heart of problem at Amazon: "Customer Obsession". Which really means "we only care about people paying us money".

If Amazon cared about creators, they would have built an automated system that monitors royalties and ensures that no matter what changes occur, creators are being paid fairly, correctly. They'd have a small product manager team who are experts in royalties because it's their job to be.

But that doesn't benefit a customer, so none of that exists. Because only people paying Amazon money are worthy of such attention.

Re: Audiblegate

#230

Post by wccrawford »

bitcharmer wrote: post #111
tjbiddle wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Never assume malice for that which can be better explained by incompetence"

I don't like this saying because it generalises too much. For example, if you follow this line of thought you'd never investigate murderous cops simply because their cameras where turned off due to their incompetence rather than purposeful, malicious action.

It's not "never investigate". It's "never assume".
Post reply on HN