If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by Patti on November 17, 2007, 6:42 am
After I had come down from cloud 10 or more, I went back to the Amazon
page, as I thought it looked different. Sure enough, it was, there was
now one actually for sale. I went to that site.
I was very upset that the Book Depository site was quoting a price less
than I have told you - my friends here on RCTQ.
I was sent a parcel of books, in advance of royalties. I thought I
would take the advantage to let friends and colleagues have the book at
less than the cover price. I did not know that retail outlets would be
getting them for less than my equivalent price.
So, I cut my price a bit from the cover price, and added the actual
postage charge. I presume that the Book Depository has some kind of
deal with a shipping organisation, as I couldn't get anywhere near to
their price - even surface mail.
I feel truly terrible about this. I will e-mail those who have asked me
for a book. I won't be able to match the Book Depository price, but
I'll try to do something.
I feel that I have been made to look like a profiteering villain, albeit
unwittingly. Please believe me that I would never do anything that even
hinted at dishonesty or sharp practice.
I hate cluttering up the NG with another message concerning my book.
But, I felt I had to explain to you. This message doesn't need replies
to clog up the newsgroup. I'll try to sort things out from here.
--
Best Regards
pat on the hill
|
|
Posted by Karen, Queen of Squishies on November 17, 2007, 9:38 am
Patti, Patti, Patti. Of course the big guys are going to be able to
undersell you. That's the way the world turns, luv. We love you, you love
us. And that's the RCTQ turns. No one on this group could possible see you
as a - how did you put it - a profiteering villain. Now you just stop
fretting right this minute. 'K?
Karen, Queen of Squishies
show/hide quoted text
> After I had come down from cloud 10 or more, I went back to the Amazon
> page, as I thought it looked different. Sure enough, it was, there was
> now one actually for sale. I went to that site.
> I was very upset that the Book Depository site was quoting a price less
> than I have told you - my friends here on RCTQ.
> I was sent a parcel of books, in advance of royalties. I thought I would
> take the advantage to let friends and colleagues have the book at less
> than the cover price. I did not know that retail outlets would be getting
> them for less than my equivalent price.
> So, I cut my price a bit from the cover price, and added the actual
> postage charge. I presume that the Book Depository has some kind of deal
> with a shipping organisation, as I couldn't get anywhere near to their
> price - even surface mail.
> I feel truly terrible about this. I will e-mail those who have asked me
> for a book. I won't be able to match the Book Depository price, but I'll
> try to do something.
> I feel that I have been made to look like a profiteering villain, albeit
> unwittingly. Please believe me that I would never do anything that even
> hinted at dishonesty or sharp practice.
> I hate cluttering up the NG with another message concerning my book. But,
> I felt I had to explain to you. This message doesn't need replies to clog
> up the newsgroup. I'll try to sort things out from here.
> --
> Best Regards
> pat on the hill
|
|
Posted by Debra on November 17, 2007, 9:49 am
I'm glad you posted about this. I have often wondered why the listed
price at online book stores was lower than the price at an author's
web site. Now I know why.
Debra in VA
See my quilts at
http://community.webshots.com/user/debplayshere
|
|
Posted by Sandy on November 17, 2007, 12:35 pm
show/hide quoted text
> After I had come down from cloud 10 or more, I went back to the Amazon
> page, as I thought it looked different. Sure enough, it was, there was
> now one actually for sale. I went to that site.
> I was very upset that the Book Depository site was quoting a price less
> than I have told you - my friends here on RCTQ.
> I was sent a parcel of books, in advance of royalties. I thought I
> would take the advantage to let friends and colleagues have the book at
> less than the cover price. I did not know that retail outlets would be
> getting them for less than my equivalent price.
> So, I cut my price a bit from the cover price, and added the actual
> postage charge. I presume that the Book Depository has some kind of
> deal with a shipping organisation, as I couldn't get anywhere near to
> their price - even surface mail.
> I feel truly terrible about this. I will e-mail those who have asked me
> for a book. I won't be able to match the Book Depository price, but
> I'll try to do something.
> I feel that I have been made to look like a profiteering villain, albeit
> unwittingly. Please believe me that I would never do anything that even
> hinted at dishonesty or sharp practice.
>
> I hate cluttering up the NG with another message concerning my book.
> But, I felt I had to explain to you. This message doesn't need replies
> to clog up the newsgroup. I'll try to sort things out from here.
show/hide quoted text
I disagree with you, Pat. <G> I think replies are completely
appropriate, as we all know you far too well to think that you'd even
consider profiting from anyone here. The "big box" stores can afford to
sell for less, since they buy in bulk for less. You were given your
copies at the regular retail price (as compensation for royalties); you
did nothing wrong.
As an aside, I thought my review would be the first for your book on
show/hide quoted text
Amazon, but I see that Tutu beat me to the punch. <G>
--
Sandy in Henderson, near Las Vegas
sw.foster1 (at) gmail (dot) com (remove/change the obvious)
http://www.sandymike.net
|
|
Posted by Johanna Gibson on November 18, 2007, 8:44 pm
wrote:
show/hide quoted text
>As an aside, I thought my review would be the first for your book on
It's like the kids who speed-read the Harry Potter books..... :)
-- Jo in Scotland
|
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Re: Serious Statement - long but important | November 17, 2007, 9:42 am |
| OT - Not a fashion statement! | June 27, 2009, 2:55 pm |
| OT: But very, very important to me | December 5, 2005, 2:52 pm |
| OT - I have an important question | December 26, 2007, 4:17 pm |
| IMPORTANT: HEAD'S UP!!! | December 23, 2008, 11:06 am |
| Re: Important info for ALL women | June 28, 2006, 11:33 am |
| important information from a Queen who knows | September 20, 2007, 11:46 am |
| Important spambot info | October 10, 2007, 10:46 am |
| OT - Kid answers to the all-important questions! | November 15, 2007, 12:19 pm |
| Both Important: Grid Marks and Pet Food | March 21, 2007, 9:03 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
> page, as I thought it looked different. Sure enough, it was, there was
> now one actually for sale. I went to that site.
> I was very upset that the Book Depository site was quoting a price less
> than I have told you - my friends here on RCTQ.
> I was sent a parcel of books, in advance of royalties. I thought I would
> take the advantage to let friends and colleagues have the book at less
> than the cover price. I did not know that retail outlets would be getting
> them for less than my equivalent price.
> So, I cut my price a bit from the cover price, and added the actual
> postage charge. I presume that the Book Depository has some kind of deal
> with a shipping organisation, as I couldn't get anywhere near to their
> price - even surface mail.
> I feel truly terrible about this. I will e-mail those who have asked me
> for a book. I won't be able to match the Book Depository price, but I'll
> try to do something.
> I feel that I have been made to look like a profiteering villain, albeit
> unwittingly. Please believe me that I would never do anything that even
> hinted at dishonesty or sharp practice.
> I hate cluttering up the NG with another message concerning my book. But,
> I felt I had to explain to you. This message doesn't need replies to clog
> up the newsgroup. I'll try to sort things out from here.
> --
> Best Regards
> pat on the hill