[sdoering]

I couldn't agree more. Also this person scandalizing and stirring things up sounded to me like trying to weapponize public opinion for personal gain.

I know from other, let's call the traditional, authors that classical book royalties were more in the 10 - 20 percent range for printed books. The upper range if you were a long published best seller with bargaining power.

So I was already irritated when he stated that 40% exclusive royalty (as a not so well known author I assume) was very little earnings per book. Without providing context that already was him trying to weapponize my opinion (at least that was how it felt to me).

Publishing that one feels there is an error on Audibles side in calculating royalties is not only legitimate but appreciated by me. I want to know that errors occur and ideally how they are fixed. Trying to manipulate me into enragement "porn" and wesponizing public outrage might be good for business or might feel like a valid approach when feeling wronged by Goliath but is - at least on my side - just off-putting.

So I do wish for all authors to be compensated based on the contracts they have with Audible. But I couldn't care less about this person's vendetta.

[alphabetting]

> Also this person scandalizing and stirring things up sounded to me like trying to weaponize public opinion for personal gain.

What is the potential gain of going after audible as an author?

[lolinder]

They explicitly say in the thread that they're trying to get enough people angry that Audible changes the deal.