Amazon Kindle 2: It's NOT too expensive

Let me start by saying that I agree with you on one thing: $359 is a lot of money. I just don't agree that it's too much to pay for an Amazon Kindle 2.

In the wake of the announcement of the Kindle 2, the general response is that it's nice and all, but the price is just too high. A price breakdown of the original device found that you'd need to buy about 60 books to make up the price difference (all while paying to get delivery of newspapers and periodicals you could read online for free). And analysts complain that Kindle is a niche product with a small, upwardly mobile target audience. And here's my question: what is the problem with that?

Isn't the Kindle, fundamentally, an early adopter's device? And aren't we usually pretty tolerant of that in the tech space? You all know this story. In the evolution of technology, devices start expensive, they target a niche audience that can afford the price and care passionately about the product, and then they either adopt more mainstream features or become mainstream through a combination of obvious value proposition and gradually lower prices.

Even though the Kindle is on its second iteration, it's still very much in early-adopter territory. Does anyone really expect that an e-book reader is going to take the entire world by storm and become the iPod-like gadget commodity of its day? Of course not; so why should it be priced like bread and milk?

Then there are the features. Amazon's wireless Whispernet, which lets you download books from anywhere you can get an EVDO connection, is a feature that, if you bought it from Sprint, would cost you $60 a month and require a two-year contract that you'd have to pay $200 to terminate early. If you bought a "subsidized" Kindle, a la the Radio Shack Netbook from Acer, you'd end up paying almost $1,800 for the thing. Sure, you don't get all the features from Whispernet that you get from a full-fledged EVDO data plan, but you're also not paying for it.

Buying a Kindle in no way guarantees Amazon book-related income, just like buying an iPod in no way guarantees Apple music-related income.

(Credit: Amazon.com)

As for the idea that Amazon should subsidize the device because it makes money off the books: I think it's bogus. Amazon doesn't make the books; it only profits from their sales. And even though the Kindle is laden with DRM that makes it difficult to load it up with non-Amazon content, it's not impossible to put other files on it. Buying a Kindle in no way guarantees Amazon book-related income, just like buying an iPod in no way guarantees Apple music-related income.

Sure, it's likely to happen, but you don't see people asking Apple to subsidize the cost of the $399 32GB iPod Touch just because you'll probably buy music, movies, and TV shows from the iTunes Store.

I'm not going to argue that the Kindle is any kind of a bargain. It's an expensive device that performs limited functions. If you're not passionate about its value proposition--reading books, magazines, newspapers, and other documents on the go and buying new content anytime the impulse arises, saving space, and helping out the environment by easing demand for paper--it's easy to decide not to buy the Kindle. That's the very definition of a luxury device, or at least an elective gadget.

On the other hand, almost anyone would covet an iPod Touch, but few can afford it. Kick up a fuss about that! The Kindle 2 is a niche device, and it shouldn't have to apologize for that fact. It doesn't have to apologize to me. I'm an early adopter (of second-generation hardware), I read almost constantly (I'll buy 60 books within a year or two, max), and I've been saving up. I preordered mine today!

[dirty55409]

what are books?

[jaxupra]

I agree with you, but for a different reason. My sister is a voracious reader, but books are getting to be impossible to handle with her MS. I bought her a Kindle last fall, and she is back to reading two to three books a week. This is a fantastic device for many reasons, and she is a good example of one of them.

[pkscout]

I don't understand the comment about needing to buy 60 books to make up the price. According to my calculations and the way I buy books, a $9.99 Kindle book will cost me anywhere between $2 and $4 *more* everytime I buy a book.

Why? I buy paperback books even though that means I have to wait longer. $9.99 is a rip-off given that there is no printing involved. Kindle books should cost no more than a paperback.

[AlanHub]

i don't think you understand that paper, shipment, and other factors of production play almost no part in the equation fo a cost of a book. Do you really think that cardboard costs the manufacturer $10 more to print in hardcover than in paperback. No, it's to make the book profitable initially.

[steve u]

The kicker is the DRM thing on top of the "no savings" e-book price.
I can lend/give away a book after I am done reading. With the Kindle, I can't.
Some publishers do get the no DRM thing. www.baen.com free library or webscriptions.

Another obvious flaw is the stupid location for the USB? / charger cable.
Doh! I rest a book there when I read and munch <G>.
No reading while charging allowed??

[geneven]

You are absolutely right; when I calculate the cost, I compare it to a perfect-condition used book, and the Kindle price is almost always higher.

I'm willing to pay a bit extra for speed and convenience, however.

The real question is not whether it is 'too expensive,' which sounds like a moral question. The real question is whether this is the best pricing strategy for Amazon? I think it is not.

I thiink that a $10 a month fee for access to Whispernet and a $200 price for the Kindle would make more money for Amazon. Or heck, maybe $5 a month.

I'm happy with my Nokia N810 computer, which cost me about $200 and which does a lot more than let me read books. But there would certainly be room in my life and my wallet for a more appealing price.

[fleurya]

"then there are the features" That's really where the problem starts. If they didn't have to load this thing down with additional features that's provide relatively little in capability, they could probably take the price down significantly. I suppose eventually manufactures will come up with budget e-readers, maybe even a "one e-reader per child" project to work towards making literature and textbooks cheaper and more easy to distribute to the world, but until then I still think it's too expensive.

I don't know specifics about the hardware, but it seems this relatively simple device shouldn't be more expensive than much more complex and powerful products like the Touch, and most netbooks!

[sdf0013]

The e-ink technology is actually not that simple. It's the main reason why all these devices are so expensive. The key technology hasn't hit mainstream so it's development and manufacturing costs have not been recovered. There aren't many companies utilizing this technology so it will take a little longer to get costs down.

[Stormspace]

"Sure, it's likely to happen, but you don't see people asking Apple to subsidize the cost of the $399 32GB iPod Touch just because you'll probably buy music, movies, and TV shows from the iTunes Store."

I disagree with this. There are plenty of people that feel 399 is too much for an mp3 player and Apple products have long been considered to produce devices with a premium price tag regardless of whether or not it's a premium product. It's just with Apples history of gouging the customer no one would ever think that they would subsidize anything, even if the product were crap, ala Apple TV. So to say that no one is asking for these products to be subsidized kinda misses the mark.

You'd be more on target if you had mentioned a premium product like TiVo and the user community has been complaining for years that these should be more heavily subsidized.

[sdf0013]

I think you missed the point that the first iPods where this expensive. That's the point to Molly's piece. It's not today's price we should compare to, but the original launch prices.

[Stormspace]

Apple has always been expensive and has never attempted to ease pricing for the customer with any product whether new or old. In fact most times Apple prefers to update their product to keep it at the same price rather than continue producing an older product that they have to price lower. If they did that, more people would likely use more Apple PC's at the least. As for Apples consumer electronics line, they've managed to put a price tag on cool. Apple better hope that the iPod fad doesn't lapse because there are plenty of competing products that do a better job for less money.

[JeffW42]

I've got a Dell Axim I bought for $240. I've read far more than 60 books with it. Many for free because they'd entered public domain and I could convert the text to microsoft reader for easy reading on the Dell. I also use it for Skype, email, internet, games, notes, bible, excel, word, acrobat reader, master remote control, music, etc. Plus, IT FITS IN MY POCKET! Why does the Kindle need to be so stupidly huge?

So here's the problem with the article. The author fails pathetically to actually compare the Kindle's price to other devices that can serve the same purpose: portable, hand held reading, etc. Does Molly Wood work for Amazon?

[JeffW42]

...and another thing, it's just a bit ignorant to refer to the Kindle as being in "early adopter" territory. You mean this is the first time people have been able to by a product that is portable and they can read news and books on it? Really? And, and, the only way I can save paper is to buy a Kindle? Say it isn't so!

[sdf0013]

You make an interesting point about there being other devices that can do some similar functions such as allow you to read a book. But, the main purpose behind these e-ink devices is that they are generally considered much easier on the eye for extended reading than digital displays such as your Axim. It's $359 because it solves the problem in a very unique way. Most digital solutions can't be used in direct sunlight. E-ink allows for a more natural reading experience the way it reflects light off the page vs being backlit (and all the other selling points).

I guess you don't follow much of Molly's articles or shows. While she does have for preference, she's not afraid to call out any company when needed.

[JeffW42]

I can turn off the backlight on the Dell. I can also read it in the sun. It's not bad on the eyes at all. I don't think Kindle has a corner on the market here. Perhaps a little more ease of use for what it was made for, but it seems you're a bit limited on your book sources.

[jabberwockgee]

Well, then you don't get the idea of e-ink.

[AlexeiK]

I agree everything you said, wished I had enough money to pre-order one. (smart of you to save budget for it) It was pretty depressing to keep adding and deleting Kindle 2 from my cart all day long :(

[barbara728]

I have to say I didn't write the above but could have. I have preordered the Kindle 2 and cancelled it twice so far. I still want it.... I have the original Kindle and love it. My reason for buying eBooks is I hate to pass along ones I've already bought and read, and was running out of space to keep them. Now the Books are on memory cards after I've read them! (Aha, but I noticed it says that the Kindle 2 doesn't have the memory card, just internal memory.)

Oh, what to do, what to do!!!!

[Rod Roddy]

Molly, you should have stopped at:

Let me start by saying that I agree with you on one thing: $359 is a lot of money.

Because in this economy...in fact, in any economy $359 IS A LOT OF MONEY. Amazon needs to really drop the price on that thing(which really hasn't changed that much by the way)and charge more for books, and mag/newspaper subscriptions, and MAYBE we can talk.

[petsche]

As a Kindle user, I'm often amused by the Kindle 'facts' stated by people who have never held one in their hands. I'm also disappointed by the information from avid users. You don't have to pay 0.99 to Amazon for classics. Any mobipocket version is readable, most free just like on a cellphone. Go to mnybks.net from the Kindle browser & you're reading Huckleberry Finn in two minutes. Many newer books are free. SciFI fan? Want to read Jeffery Carver's new book Sunborn? Try out the first 3 Chaos Chronicle books first for nothing, available from the authors site, or Mobile Read Forums or webscription.net, as a teaser. Many, many, newer books are available like that.

In the last year, I've read about 35 books on my Kindle, half new or newer, half classics. I paid Amazon for just 5 of them. All of it legal.

I also read two newspapers daily that I pay Amazon for. It's much better than reading them on the internet & after you get used to it, better than reading the real paper. No ads, no go to page A13, no scrolling, no popups. The only drawback is you finding you actually read more of the paper you're paying for. It can take longer.

You can read for hours and hours on the Kindle. No eye strain. Crank up the font size and relax. The battery lasts forever if you keep the wireless access switched off. Read the latest junk novel, 160 triple spaced, large print pages on a cellphone, sure, maybe. Read Moby DIck? I don't want to go blind.

[damack1]

I'm surprised at the number of people who seem truly irate about Amazon's pricing strategy, as if it were some kind of moral issue. The decision of how much to charge for a Kindle is a business decision. Period. Amazon probably has enough data to decide whether pricing the Kindle lower, resulting in the sale of more ebooks and fewer paper books, is a winning proposition for them.

For the rest of us, this is not a meat and potatoes issue. No one is going hungry by not being able to afford a Kindle. It's a luxury item, pure and simple. You can argue with their business decision, but why get all in a twist about it?

I ordered a Kindle yesterday because I've been waiting for the new one pretty much ever since they launched the first one, which was just too ugly for me to consider. Lately I've been ordering ebooks from Fictionwise to read on another device, and you might be interested to know that many of their ebooks are priced at $20+. The $10 Amazon charges is a bargain by comparison, though I would certainly like to see the price come down to say, around $5.

[drfrost]

I think it's a symptom of the "entitlement" attitude. Also, many people seem to think it's a sin to make money. They don't seem to be complaining about the infrastructure such business practices has afforded them.... If you want to be a communist, go to Russia. See for yourself how well such a system works....

[molotov]

Amazon Kindle is like sattelite radio. It is a money losing venture that is never going to materialize into anything but a few geeks huddled together in a basement ording the same book though 'whispernet' that they all agreed on reading this evening. Of course there is no reception so they will have to go outside and download the books while holding up their Kindles to the sky.
I have a e-book reader already and I am willing to advertise it; iPod Touch. Thats right, the same item that can browse the net, play music, video, online radio and run 1,000's of applications can also read e-books. The Touch is smart, because the screen adjusts to the surrounding light, so when in the sun the screen shines extra bright and in the dark goes dim. Surely, Kindle geeks love the black and white, after all; who needs color... or a touch screen in that case? I
Not to take the rain on Kindle geek parade, but I can flip my pages on the Touch by swiping my finger across the page, but once again; its the pressing of the 'next' page button that makes you forget that you're actually using an e-reader, right?
Look people, admit it; Kindle is your toy that you think will get you to read more books, because you do not have the natural drive the read. It won't last, at least not as long to recoup the cost of the thing. Just give it up.

[Arnav]

I am sorry, unlike you I dont have hawkeye vision. I need a larger screen and the size of a paperback is fine(the size of the screen on the Kindle) Please do not argue iPod Touch/iPhone because they are so different in so many aspects, its not even funny.
Screen size is important for me (one of the reasons I wont buy a Netbook). While some things might be doable I can never see myself use any phone for reading any document. I read a lot and frankly this product appeals to me and if not for my current financial situation I would buy it in a flash.

[molotov]

I understand your problem Arnav. Your mind is boggled by the idea of one piece of technology doing many things well. You are still in the frame of mind where every item must do one thing and one thing only. Years ago people would avoid withdrawing from ATMs because it was a new technology and people would not trust it - thinking it would 'eat their money'. The Touch' screen is not that much smaller and the spacing, as well as font size can be adjusted to your needs - just like on the Kindle.

[CliffK2]

Molotov:

You say, "Your mind is boggled by the idea of one piece of technology doing many things well. You are still in the frame of mind where every item must do one thing and one thing only." You are referring to your Itouch. I too have an Itouch, I use it for listening to music, playing games, and running some apps. I occasionally use its Opera to browse, but the screen is much smaller than the Kindle. I find myself constandly enlarging the text when using the Itouch to browse, and when the text gets large enough to read, I am then constantly scrolling. So I like my Itouch, but for me, it is not an easy or effective way to read a lot of text. The Kindle appears to be a much easier way to read text.

You use the ATM argument to support your position but the ATM is pretty much a one trick pony - it dispenses money and takes in money. It might also dispense stamps and tell you your balance, but It pretty much does one thing and does it really well. So the ATM is actually an example of a dedicated machine doing one thing really well, just like the Kindle.

To support my side of the discussion that having a device do one one thing really well is sometimes better than having a device to multiple things just okay, I will use the farm tractor as an example. It does farm work really well - ask it to prepare a field for planting and it excels. You can also use it to drive to the grocery store, but it won't get you there very fast and it will use a bit of gas. So in some cases, having a device do one thing really well is the way to go.

Finally, you infer that people that use the Kindle are like people afraid to use an ATM. Not true. The people who are trying the Kindle are early adapters.

[steve u]

I would rather have a dedicated device that did a job very well, rather than a "all in one" tool that just got the job done :/
The Kindle with e-ink is so much easier on the eyes than a back lighted LCD device.
With separates, I can listen to MP-3's or talk on the phone while I read (OK, not well).
I was ready to plunk down the $360 even with DRM but they took 1 step forward(16 shades) , and 2 steps back(No SD slot, no case).

[Alphaman63]

Hear! Hear!

I would rather have one device that fits in my pocket and does a dozen things, than a dozen devices that each does one thing, and none of which fit in my pocket.

I've owned my share of ebook readers, both hardware and software, but not the Kindle; it's too big and I'm tired of one-trick-ponies. I am eagerly awaiting the next gen 64GB iPod Touch. For about the price of a Kindle, I'll have so much more, and in a much smaller and thinner package.

The Kindle is just not compelling to me.

[gary85739]

I download a lot of spoken books on my iPod from the local library for FREE!

Most any type of MP3 gadget will do...the Kindle is nice because it's BIG screen is easy to read, but "if" those books are SPOKEN, well, all ya really need is ear plugs!

[JCeresJ]

Way to go Molly. I bought a Kindle fully aware of the cost and it's limitations. On the other hand what it does it does well. And I happen to like what it does (allows me to read, comfortably, on the go, without eye strain, etc) it does well. And I am willing and able to pay for that. If other people don't think it's worth it then they don't have to buy it. A Toyota Camry is a lot more sensible purchase than a two door Mercedes. But the Mercedes does what it does so much nicer. You don't hear people complaining that the Mercedes is too expensive per se, rather people might say that it is too expensive for them. Thus it should be with the Kindle.

Happy reading.

[Renegade Knight]

When the Sony reader works better for you, can you transfer your kindle books? Can you even sell your Kindle with the books on it to a 3rd party if you can't keep them?

I agree with the article but i think there is an easy fix to all the griping. Include 10 free e-books! Now i'm not saying i know the economics behind it but ,what I can say is it will shut people up haha.

[bdattern]

Early adaptor = having a dusty gadget in your closet this time next year. We're already talking about Kindle 2? Not so long ago you had to lug around a cell phone, MP3 player, Blackberry and a laptop to have all of the latest "conveniences" at your fingertips. Now you need one device. We, the consumer majority, want technology that adapts to us, not the other way around. Bottom line: It is too expensive, it's not very convenient and it's not catching on. Maybe if they gave away the device for free and just sold the e-books. But then how long until that techonolgy cracks and e-books can be found for free? Eg., almost every movie you buy these days comes with a free digital copy. The wise will wait.

[Malixe]

I know you get paid to write this kind of stuff and I read it (OK, skimmed it) because I am an inveterate reader. I'm afraid it pretty much translated in my brain to 'blah, blah, blah' though. As an inveterate reader, I think the Kindle is pretty cool, and I would love to have one. When it's cost is comparable to its value *to me*. I've been an early adapter plenty of times, and as someone else pointed out, it usually means getting stuck with overpriced technology that matures and is obsolete much faster than you expected. After a few of those experiences, you learn to be a little more careful and a little more cautious about what you choose to 'adapt to early'.

Right now you can tap-dance as fast as you want trying to tell me different, but I can tell you that as far as I'm concerned, the Kindle is overpriced by about $160. And the Kindle 2 is still physically, slightly larger than it really should be. I can wait until Amazon's pricing gets a little more realistic or something better than what they have to offer comes along. And it probably won't be too long before one or the other comes to pass.

[SeanHoi]

Naively, the author claims that an Acer with a network would cost $1,800 if one were to achieve the same result -- having online access...

The thing is that the amount of data required for a Kindle book or news paper is so small that if you look at the premium on the item (book, paper, etc.), the price per MB you arrive at is ridiculously high. What Sprint and Amazon do is sell a tiny bit of bandwidth for a lot of money. Remember how excited Sprint was about the partnership? No wonder.

Claiming that you are "not paying it" (nicely emphasized in italics by the author) is very, very naive. Or bad salesmanship -- the piece looks like a poorly disguised advertisement.

Right now, the networking capability is hugely overvalued compared to its price -- like Amazon stock used to be in the not so distant past. And really, is it such a pain to download books and papers at a Wifi spot or via a computer (we work by one each and every day)? Is it really SO pressing to get the latest bestseller or New York Times that it's got to be over Whispernet?

Maybe one day, the Kindle and the bandwidth that comes with the purchase of the books will be reasonably priced. It's cute. But not $359-and-a-huge-premium-on-the-bandwidth-cute.

[MadLyb]

The Kindle is expensive
The Kindle is ugly
The e-Books are expensive
The Kindle is ugly
The e-Books are covered in DRM
The Kindle is ugly
No Sprint coverage in my area
The Kindle is ugly
Poor PDF support
The Kindle is ugly
I do not 'own' the e-Books
The Kindle is ugly
The capacity is limited
The Kindle is ugly
A book does not need a keyboard
The Kindle is ugly
A book does not need speakers
The Kindle is ugly

Did I mention that the Kindle is ugly?

[scifidaddyo]

I would consider a kindle. If there was a version that did not have the "wispernet" connection and i would buy books online and then download to the kindle. Also, if the price for this "wispernet" less version was around $200.00 and it came with 15 free books of my choosing, i'd buy one right now.

[Earthlin]

Molly, Molly, Molly ... your anti-Apple bias is showing again. You're saying kick up a fuss about the 399 $ price for a 32 Gb iPod touch and yet it has 16x the memory of a Kindle, more horsepower, color screen, accelerometer, real internet surfing, E-mail, personal agenda, address book, (phone, camera, GPS and ... with the iPhone) and can do 100s more things than a Kindle. And yet you seem to find the $ 50 additional cost of the Touch more outrageous than the $ 349 price of the one-trick pony Kindle. Based on the price of a Kindle, the iPod Touch should be at least twice the price. I kind of question your objectivity as a journalist when it comes to Apple.

[tcr071]

You're an idiot. There was no bias present but you read into it what you will and find something that was never intended.

[Inconnux]

I completely agree. I am an avid reader and I thing the Kindle is the worst idea to ever make it to market!. I have a Palm TX that I use for reading books. Plenty of free books out there and I use librivox.org for audio books. I would recommend any other product (Palm/Netbook/Ipod) long before the Kindle.