Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jsnell 1583 days ago
Across the system, not per-user.

The only funky thing is that IIUC the computation of the total income across the whole system is done based on credits sold that month, rather than deferring the income from selling a credit to the month in which the credit is spent.

2 comments

That funky thing sounds like it would work in authors' favor overall. I would guess there's some percent of credits that are sold but never used. So if Amazon only paid on on used credits, Amazon would be able to keep that money. If Amazon pays out on sold credits, the authors get it. Although the distribution between the authors can be wrong, leading to some individual authors losing out even if authors overall benefit.

Although if Amazon is always paying out some contractual minimum instead of the shared amount, then none of this makes a difference.

I wonder if authors are the ones who pay for the free Audible subscriptions that American Express Platinum card holders get now?

There is a huge a “Hollywood accounting” problem that never really went away (it’s how Warner Brothers markets HBO Max for free, how bands on major labels & even indies never recoup, and now possibly know how Amazon grows audible at no cost to themselves).