Roll call

Since I had to move my blog to a new address, I've noticed my traffic has taken a nose dive. I'm guessing that might be because a lot of readers were following my blog through Blogger's reader, and now that my feed address has changed, they aren't getting updates. I did set up the old address to forward to the new one, but that won't do anything for the feed.

Have you figured out my blog's new address? If so, please change the links on your own blog and, if you don't mind, post a small announcement so that others can find me again. Thanks so much!

More on the Colorado-Amazon battle

No answers yet on what will happen with the Colorado sales tax bill that Amazon is protesting. However, there have been lots of articles on the subject in our local paper, some of them quite interesting.

For example, there is a fantastic editorial on Amazon's decision to fire Colorado-based affiliates, in which the author calls Amazon "evil." Amen!

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who don't agree, and it sounds like they are causing some trouble at the capital. I fervently hope the state legislature won't give in to these folks, who have been manipulated into doing Amazon's dirty work for them (when by all rights they should be spending their time finding alternative affiliate programs and getting their businesses back on track!). I really don't want Amazon to win this one — they need to be taken down a notch, in my opinion, and I'd really like to see my state be the one to do it!

I urge my fellow writers, readers, and bloggers to do something about this. Obviously we can't take down Amazon amongst ourselves, but we can give our money to hardworking local businesses and honest, reputable chains instead of Amazon!

Alternatives for Colorado-based Amazon affiliates

Every since Amazon behaved badly Monday morning by firing Colorado-based affiliates, I've been dealing with the fallout. I decided pretty quickly that I was done with an Amazon — as an affiliate as well as a consumer — and immediately started looking for new affiliate programs for my book review blog, wedding blog, and doll repair blog.

My first thought was to apply for the Barnes & Noble affiliate program. Ironically, I joined their program back when I first joined Amazon, but ended up going with the latter because their system was easier to use. The B&N affiliate program is different now — it's part of the Google Affiliate Network, which includes many more affiliate programs than just Barnes & Noble — and I was pleased to find that the new system is just as user-friendly as Amazon's. And personally, I like the overall results much better — I think the larger image of the book cover provides a much cleaner look than Amazon's ad.

I applied for the program Monday afternoon, and by Monday evening had an acceptance. I immediately changed the book links in the sidebars of all my blogs except my wedding blog (that one is still on my to-do list). Yesterday I also applied for a couple of other advertisers in the program, and set up a few other affiliate ads for my blog about feline hepatic lipidosis.

On Tuesday, I got a recommendation to try the Powells.com partner program. I signed up and was able to get started right away. This system is even more user-friendly than the Google Affiliate Network, and I like it considerably better than Amazon's program. I especially like the fact that Powell's buys used books online — they pay the shipping too. You can check out the program by clicking the link in the sidebar, under the ad for the book I'm currently reading.

Yesterday, I changed over a number of my more recent links on my book review blog. I still have a lot to do though, and I expect it to be a few more days before I am done switching over to the new affiliate programs.

The best thing about these two programs is how much easier payment is than Amazon. With Amazon, if you want cash you have to wait until you reach $100 in commissions, which takes a while for someone like me, for whom the income is only supplementary. But it seems like the businesses in the Google Affiliate Network pay after a set number of days — e.g., 30, 60, or 90 days — while Powell's pays at the end of the quarter where you reach $25. Plus, the Google Affiliate Network (which I keep wanting to call GAN!) links up with your Google AdSense account, which is pretty convenient.

My point is that there are many options for former Colorado-based Amazon affiliates. Much better options with more honest companies, if you ask me. Personally, even if Amazon reinstates the Colorado affiliates (which I really think they will, whether or not the Colorado legislature calls their bluff — they can't give up all those referrals!), I could never trust them again after this. But I feel much more secure after signing up for affiliate programs I like, with businesses I respect. If you ask me, Amazon did me a favor!

Has Amazon gotten too big for its britches?

This morning I woke up to find an email from Amazon, stating that they were closing the accounts for all Colorado-based affiliates. Apparently the Colorado legislature passed a bill that would require Amazon to collect sales tax for Colorado sales.

Dear Colorado-based Amazon Associate:
We are writing from the Amazon Associates Program to inform you that the Colorado government recently enacted a law to impose sales tax regulations on online retailers. The regulations are burdensome and no other state has similar rules. The new regulations do not require online retailers to collect sales tax. Instead, they are clearly intended to increase the compliance burden to a point where online retailers will be induced to "voluntarily" collect Colorado sales tax -- a course we won't take.

We and many others strongly opposed this legislation, known as HB 10-1193, but it was enacted anyway. Regrettably, as a result of the new law, we have decided to stop advertising through Associates based in Colorado. We plan to continue to sell to Colorado residents, however, and will advertise through other channels, including through Associates based in other states.

There is a right way for Colorado to pursue its revenue goals, but this new law is a wrong way. As we repeatedly communicated to Colorado legislators, including those who sponsored and supported the new law, we are not opposed to collecting sales tax within a constitutionally-permissible system applied even-handedly. The US Supreme Court has defined what would be constitutional, and if Colorado would repeal the current law or follow the constitutional approach to collection, we would welcome the opportunity to reinstate Colorado-based Associates.

You may express your views of Colorado's new law to members of the General Assembly and to Governor Ritter, who signed the bill.

Your Associates account has been closed as of March 8, 2010, and we will no longer pay advertising fees for customers you refer to Amazon.com after that date. Please be assured that all qualifying advertising fees earned prior to March 8, 2010, will be processed and paid in accordance with our regular payment schedule. Based on your account closure date of March 8, any final payments will be paid by May 31, 2010.

We have enjoyed working with you and other Colorado-based participants in the Amazon Associates Program, and wish you all the best in your future.


Best Regards,

The Amazon Associates Team

At first, I was angry at the legislature for passing the bill. But a few things started to occur to me:

1) Amazon totally misrepresented the bill in their email. Basically, the bill states that if an out-of-state retailer has Colorado-based affiliates soliciting business for them, they are responsible for collecting Colorado sales tax. The bill also states provides recourse if a business that fits this description refuses to collect sales tax. You can see the full text, along with all the revisions, here.

2) Amazon isn't trying to protect affiliates. They are simply trying to avoid having to collect sales tax. They don't even have to pay the sales tax, just collect and track it, and they are still willing to throw their affiliates under the bus to avoid doing so.

3) It was Amazon's decision to dump their Colorado-based affiliates. Not the Colorado legislature's. In fact, the latter tried to write the bill so that it would protect the affiliates. So if I want to be angry with someone, it should be Amazon, not our lawmakers.

4) This is hardly Amazon's first instance of trying to throw their weight around in order to another entity to do something that benefits them, Amazon. Two years ago they tried to force POD publishers to use their printer, BookSurge, in order to sell self-published books on their site. Booklocker sued Amazon under the antitrust laws, which Amazon settled back in January. Also in January, Amazon turned off the "Buy" buttons for MacMillan titles in an effort to force the major publishing company to sell their ebooks for $9.99 or less. MacMillan refused, and Amazon gave in, restoring the Buy buttons on the publisher's titles. And supposedly, Amazon has intervened in other states with similar sales tax legislation — in those cases, with more success.

So when I finally wrote to the governor and representatives, it wasn't to complain — as Amazon wanted — but to say that I hoped they didn't give in to Amazon's bullying tactics. No corporation should be able to strongarm legislation like that.

Here are a few links with more information on the situation:

Amazon.com Associates Central discussion thread
Amazon Pulls Affiliates Out of Colorado, Gov. Ritter Responds
Amazon fires Colorado affiliates in protest
Colorado Lawmakers Ruin My Amazon Affiliate Sales (Be sure to read the comments!)
Amazon Fires Its Colorado Associates (Another blog post with a very heated comment thread)
Amazon.com needlessly fires affiliates in tantrum over tax law

I'm done with Amazon, even if they restore Colorado-based affiliates. (I expect they will, because it doesn't sound like the Colorado legislature will give in — good for them! — and Amazon won't want to lose all those referrals permanently.) I'm in the process of finding an affiliate program to replace Amazon on my websites, and in the meantime I'll be slowly taking down my Amazon links.

I'm also done buying from Amazon, and I encourage others to do the same. There are much worthier businesses to support, both online and locally!

Update 3/9/2010 1:00 am:

In reading the last couple of links listed above, I found out something interesting: The version of the bill I linked to is not the most recent. So far I haven't found the version of the bill that was passed, but apparently it removed all references to affiliates — in other words, it made it so that having affiliates in Colorado had nothing to do with Amazon's responsibilities under the law. Furthermore, they are not required to collect sales tax, only to notify Colorado customers that sales tax is owed.

One of the representatives I wrote to this afternoon wrote back to say that in actuality, sales tax is always owed on Internet purchases — this bill just requires online retailers to notify customers of this fact, since most people don't realize it.

I'll update with more information as I get it, so be sure to check this post again later!

Update 3/9/2010 1:26 am:

I believe that this is the most recent version of HB 10-1193. As you can see, no mention of affiliates.