出版商要擴張要做大規(guī)模 方能抵御亞馬遜

InefficiencyisnotaqualityusuallyassociatedwithAmazonbutJeffBezos’scompanyisbehavingasifitisasmall,disorganiseedbookstorethatcannotquitecontrolitsstock.“Youwantthatbook,doyou?Verysorrybutwehaverunout.Wecanorderyouanothercopybuttheyaretakingalongtimetoarriveatthemoment.Howaboutbuyinganothertitleinstead?”“低效”與亞馬遜(Amazon)通常沾不上邊，但杰夫8226;貝索斯(JeffBezos)的這家公司現(xiàn)在卻表現(xiàn)得像一家組織混亂、庫存控制不力的小書店?！澳阆胭I那本書是嗎？不好意思，庫存沒貨。我們可以為您預訂一本，但要花很長時間才能送到。要不買本別的書吧？”Itisaruse,ofcourse.WhenAmazontellsitsUScustomersthatTheSilkworm,thenewnovelbyRobertGalbraith,apseudonymforJKRowling,is“currentlyunavailable”,itisnottellingthetruth.WhatitmeansisthatitisnotmakingthebookavailableforpreorderbecauseitispublishedbyHachette,fromwhichAmazonistryingtoforcediscounts.這當然是騙人。亞馬遜告訴美國顧客，羅伯特8226;加爾布雷思（RobertGalbraith，J8226;K8226;羅琳(JKRowling)的筆名）的小說新作《蠶》(TheSilkworm)“目前無貨”，說的不是實話。亞馬遜的真實意思是，它不會預售該書，因為這本書由Hachette出版，而亞馬遜正在試圖迫使該出版社提供折扣。ThisisthemomentpublishershavefearedsincetheylostanantitrustcaseintheUSandEuropelastyear.“Theywereconcernedthat,shouldAmazoncontinuetodominatethesaleofebookstoconsumers,itwouldstarttodemandlowerwholesaleprices,”wroteDeniseCote,theUSdistrictjudge.SheruledthatthepublishershadconspiredwithAppletoraisebookpricesinitsstore.出版商們自從去年在美國和歐洲輸?shù)粢粯斗磯艛喙偎疽詠恚銓@種場景憂心忡忡?！八鼈儞模绻麃嗰R遜繼續(xù)壟斷電子書的銷售，它將開始要求降低批發(fā)價格，”美國地區(qū)法官丹尼絲8226;科特(DeniseCote)寫道。她裁定，出版商與蘋果(Apple)合謀提高蘋果商店里的電子書價格。Byformingablatantcartel,the“bigsix”publishersandApplebotchedtheirefforttoresistAmazon’sdominanceofebookswiththeKindle.Itmadethestrangestantitrustcasesofrecentyears–theUSgovernmentandtheEuropeanCommissionrushingtotheaidofanemergingmonopolist.因為組成的同業(yè)聯(lián)盟太過明目張膽，“六大”出版商和蘋果在抵抗亞馬遜通過Kindle壟斷電子書的斗爭中馬失前蹄。此案成為近年來最奇怪的反壟斷案件之一——美國政府和歐盟委員會(EuropeanCommission)竟然急著去幫助一家正在崛起的壟斷企業(yè)。MrBezosoncesuggestedthatAmazontreatsmallpublishers“thewayacheetahwouldpursueasicklygazelle”,wroteBradStoneinTheEverythingStore,hiscorporatebiography.Hachetteisoneofthesmallerbigfive–reducedfromsixbythePenguin-RandomHousemerger–andisvulnerable.布拉德8226;斯通(BradStone)在亞馬遜公司傳記《一網(wǎng)打盡》(TheEverythingStore)中寫道，貝索斯曾提出，亞馬遜應像“獵豹追逐羸弱的瞪羚”那樣對待小出版商。Hachette是“五大”（原本為六大，因為企鵝(Penguin)與蘭登書屋(RandomHouse)的合并而減少為五大）出版商中較小的一家，容易受到亞馬遜的沖擊。IhavemixedfeelingsaboutAmazon.MrBezoshascreatedaremarkablecompanywhosedevotiontopleasingcustomersandcuttingpricesputscompetitorstoshame.Itreimaginedwhatretailingshouldbelike,notjustbyputtingitonline,butbymakingiteasier.我對亞馬遜愛恨交加。貝索斯創(chuàng)辦了一家出色的公司，它對滿足顧客和減價的執(zhí)著令競爭對手汗顏。它重新塑造了零售業(yè)，不僅實現(xiàn)了在線零售，還讓零售變得更方便。HealsocutthroughthefumblingsofrivalssuchasSonyincreatingtheKindle.ItdidnotovertaketheSonyReaderandtheNookmerelybecauseofAmazon’smarketingpowerandmanufacturingefficiency.Itisasuperiordeviceandislinkedtoabrilliant(whenMrBezosletsitwork)onlinestore.貝索斯還打造了Kindle，從索尼(Sony)等競爭對手的笨拙產(chǎn)品中脫穎而出。Kindle之所以超過索尼閱讀器和Nook，不只是因為亞馬遜的營銷能力和生產(chǎn)效率。Kindle性能優(yōu)越，并與優(yōu)秀的在線商店（當貝索斯讓其正常運轉(zhuǎn)的時候就是優(yōu)秀的）相連接。Despiteitscurrenttactics,Amazonhasbeenaprofitablepartnertopublishers–bringinginnovationtoabusinessofcustomandpractice.“Amazonisthepublishers’bestaccount.Itofferstremendousvolumewithnoreturns[ofunsoldbooks]andpreorderinghelpsthemputtheirbooksonbestsellerlistsondayone,”saysMikeShatzkin,aconsultant.雖然目前采取了不友好的策略，但亞馬遜一直能為出版商創(chuàng)造豐厚的利潤，為一個以規(guī)矩和慣例著稱的行業(yè)帶來創(chuàng)新。顧問邁克8226;沙茨金(MikeShatzkin)表示：“亞馬遜是出版商的最佳客戶。它銷量巨大，不會退貨（未售出書籍），并且可以通過預售讓出版商的書從第一天就登上暢銷書排行榜?！盉utitisdisturbinglyruthless,withahardlydisguisedambitiontoforceothersuppliersandintermediaries–includingpublishersandbookstores–outofbusiness.Itisamachineforsqueezingmargins,8201;includingitsown,tonear-zeroinordertocutprices.但亞馬遜的冷酷令人不安，它也毫不掩飾自己的雄心：將其他供應商和中間商——包括出版商和書店——擠出這塊業(yè)務。亞馬遜變成了一臺機器，為了削減價格，將利潤（包括它自己的）擠壓到接近于零的水平。Thesemarginsincludenotonlypublishers’profitsbutroyaltiesandadvancestoauthors,whichhavebeenfalling.“Thisisapunitive,vindictive,viciousanti-culturecompany,”saysAndrewWylie,theauthors’agent.“Ifitdoesn’tlikethewaynegotiationsaregoing,itpunishesthepublishersandreaders.Idon’tunderstandwhythisisnotsubjecttolegalredress.”這不僅包括出版商的利潤，還包括作者獲得的版稅和預付金——這些收入也在下降。“亞馬遜是一家苛刻、小氣、惡毒、反文化的公司，”作家經(jīng)紀人安德魯8226;威利(AndrewWylie)表示，“如果它不喜歡談判的走向，便懲罰出版商和讀者。我不理解這種行為為何沒有被繩之以法?！盩hereliesAmazon’sadvantage–itneednotformacarteltosqueezeitssuppliersbecauseitisalreadylarge.Witha30percentshareofthephysicalbookmarketintheUSandmorethan60percentofebooks,itclearlyhasmarketpowerintheantitrustsense.ButtherehasneverbeenacaseinUScompetitionlawofasinglecompanybeingdeclaredanillegalmonopsonist.這是亞馬遜的優(yōu)勢所在——它不需要組成同業(yè)聯(lián)盟來壓榨供應商，因為它的規(guī)模已經(jīng)夠大。亞馬遜占據(jù)了美國紙質(zhì)書市場30%的份額和電子書市場逾60%的份額，從反壟斷的角度來說，它無疑具有市場權(quán)力。但在美國反壟斷法的歷史上，從未有單獨一家公司被宣布為非法買方壟斷者的案例。“IntheUS,thesimpleusebyonecompanyofmonopsonypowertoextractlowerpricesfromsuppliersisnotillegal.Thereisgeneralintuitionthatbuyerpowermeanslowerpricesandlowerpricesaregood,”saysJonathanJacobson,anantitrustlawyeratWilson,Sonsini,Goodrich&RosatiinNewYork.“在美國，一家公司利用買方壟斷使供應商降低價格，不構(gòu)成非法行為。一般的看法是，買方權(quán)力意味著低價，而低價是有利的，”紐約威爾遜8226;桑西尼8226;古奇8226;羅沙迪律師事務所(Wilson,Sonsini,Goodrich&Rosati)反壟斷律師喬納森8226;雅各布森(JonathanJacobson)表示。Amazonmaybebreakingthelawwithadeceptivesalespractice–tellingitscustomersthatHachettebooksintheUS(andBonnierbooksinGermany,whereitiswagingasimilarcampaign)are“unavailable”whentheycanbeboughtquicklyfromitscompetitors.Intermsofantitrustlaw,however,thebiggestforceinbooksissecure.亞馬遜的欺騙性銷售手段可能違法——它告訴顧客，Hachette的圖書在美國“無貨”（還有邦尼(Bonnier)的圖書在德國也是如此——亞馬遜使用了同樣的手段），但顧客卻能在競爭對手那里輕而易舉地買到。不過，就反壟斷法而言，亞馬遜這家圖書領域的龍頭企業(yè)是安全的。Thereisamoralforpublishers:getbigger.PenguinhasmergedwithRandomHouse(Pearson,theowneroftheFinancialTimes,holdsa47percentstakeinPenguinRando