A Christmas Eve Financial Times article indicates that while e-reader sales in 2012 will still be robust, the category may be on the brink of a rapid decline in popularity. Its source is IHS iSuppli. I’ve found the data in a graph from emarketer.com (note the convoluted chain of attribution–PSI cites emarketer, which in turn cites CNET citing IHS).
The reason for the falloff? …the rise of light, powerful cheap multi-function tablets, which can serve as e-readers as well as do a lot of other stuff, for within a reasonable distance of the price of a dedicated e-reader alone. This development wouldn’t be surprising, since the multi-function smartphone has replaced the dedicated music player for many users.
(The above is what I see as the consensus view. It’s not a unanimous one, though. The Market Intelligence and Consulting Institute, which presumably has special insight into the Taiwanese companies that actually make the e-readers, predicts a bounceback in sales for 2013. So we should at least keep in mind that the consensus may not be correct.)
Implications, if the FT is right?
In a world where the decision on what merchant to buy an e-book from hinges on what dedicated e-reader you own, the firm with the largest number of e-readers in circulation (Amazon) should be the dominant factor. Other, non-compatible e-reader makers, like Barnes and Noble, should have small relative market shares. Other would-be booksellers are footnotes, at best.
The game changes substantially, I think, if the key decision becomes what app the potential buyer has on his tablet. That’s because any customer can download a new book app with a couple of taps. Unlike the case with music, where users may want to construct playlists, it probably doesn’t matter much whether one’s entire library is on one app or several. So the key factor in the purchase decision probably comes down to price.
It’s possible that AMZN can develop a tablet that’s the full equivalent of a Samsung or Google offering. The performance of the Kindle Fire suggests that’s not likely. But, if it can, perhaps AMZN can preserve its “ecosystem” with avid readers for a while longer. And in doing so it would be able to bar the download of other booksellers’ apps onto its machines.
Personally, I doubt Barnes and Noble will be able to create a viable tablet. Yes, it does have its alliance with MSFT. But that only seems to me to guarantee that BKS can have the Zune of tablets.
AAPL is in an unusual position. Its strategy has been to generate superior profits by selling up-market devices at premium prices. Does it want to compete in the (eventual) $100 tablet market? My off-the-cuff guess is that it doesn’t. By default, this makes AAPL less of a player in the e-book market.
On the one hand, this would make the big publishers’ alliance with AAPL of a few years ago look extremely short-sighted. On the other, it creates the opportunity for them to have a common app that bypasses both BKS and AMZN.
Any restructuring book distribution by cutting out dedicated e-readers is obviously not a reason for the companies that control the e-reader market to celebrate. The biggest single loser, I think, is potentially BKS, since AMZN has 3x the market share in e-books that BKS has. It isn’t that AMZN escapes the change unscathed. But it already has lower prices than BKS; its large relative size gives it another big advantage in the price-drive. environment I think will develop. Also, it’s not clear that AAPL will abandon the up-market strategy that snatched it out of the jaws of bankruptcy to become a serious competitor in the mass tablet market.
All in all, I score the situation as a net plus for AMZN.
The wildcard is potential new competitors who might be able do offer superior app performance.