CM Materials

cmmaterials

Materials and equipment needed To build and test these test lungs, some equipment is essential. The following is a list of suggested gear: Compressed air source: oil free compressor, several cfm at > 50psi Recommended: Porter-Cable C2002 Pressure gauge: should read 0–50 cmH2O range with <1 cmH2O resolution, preferably with differential inputs, preferably digital Recommended: Risepro HT-1890 Flow meter: should read 0–60 lpm with < 1 lpm resolution, preferably digital Recommended: no recommendation yet Rigid vessel: one 14 gallon or three 5 or 6 gallon glass carboys (from home brewing store) (or) Flexible bag: anaesthesia bag, 2–3 liters (or other similar size bag) Recommended: Smiths Portex #370924 Plastic sheets (for springs): 12x12 inch, 1/8 thick, HDPE, polypropylene, or polycarbonate Recommended: McMaster 2898K11 https://www.mcmaster.com/2898k11 Tubing: 3/4 inch PVC pipe, schedule 40 (from hardware store) — By Alex Izvorski and Robert L. Read Teams building and testing ventilators for COVID-19 need to have “test lungs”. The term “test lung” sometimes means a physical air-tight container with sophisticated instrumentation added, but here we mean just the physical container without the instruments. A test lung is a simulator of a real pair of lungs, but made in such a way that it has standard and stable physical properties. In particular, it should press against air inside it when inflated, just like real lungs, which is called . It should oppose air from moving in or out too fast (just like real lungs which can’t fill or empty instantly) this is called . It is almost impossible to understand how an emergency pandemic ventilator designed to help humans breathe will behave without testing on test lungs. Engineers building prototypes need a way to test on their workbench, even if much more rigorous testing will eventually be needed before a ventilator is used on a patient. This article teaches how to model compliance and resistance, and will be useful if you need to understand those concepts, or if you actually need to test a pandemic ventilator. compliance resistance (A Commercial test lung with a resistance tube and barbed bleed adapter.) How Doctors Measure Pressure For respiration, only pressure differences matter. Breathing is driven not by atmospheric pressure, but by difference in pressure in the airway compared to atmospheric pressure. Although engineers normally use the SI unit of pressure, which is the Pascal, the medical profession usually measures pressure in terms of the height of a column of water it will raise — -hence, centimeters of water, denoted as cmH2O. 1 cmH2O is approximately equal to 98 Pa. It takes 70 cm H2O to make one psi. Breathing pressure differentials almost never go above one psi! To measure pressure inside an airway, you have to get a pressure meter probe or sensor sealed inside the airway. Adult airways use an international 22mm standard. A barbed bleed adapter is a convenient way to insert a pressure sensor into an airway. This is about the size of ¾” PVC tubing, which is widely available. (A smaller port in the airway makes taking a pressure measurement easier.) Compliance Typical healthy lungs have a compliance around 20–50 milliliters/cmH2O. In other words, pushing in 20–50 ml air would raise pressure by 1 cmH2O. (Different lungs or diseases have different compliance curves.) The compliance of real lungs is not completely constant. Just like a balloon getting tight as it gets full, the lungs require more pressure to push or pull another milliliter in as they get more full. That is why a plot of pressure vs. volume is a typical S-shaped curve. Some disease conditions make the lungs stiff (low compliance), or even loose (high compliance). Because applying too much pressure to a patient’s lungs or blowing too much air into them causes serious injury, ventilators have to be tested against realistic compliance and resistance. Resistance Typical healthy lungs also have a resistance around 3–7 cmH2O/(liters/second). Thus, pushing air in at a constant flow rate of 1 liter/second (60 liters per minute) would raise pressure by 3–7 cmH2O (in addition to the change due to compliance). A realistic test lung is simply a combination of an element with a known resistance and an element with a known compliance. Commercial Test Lungs Instrumented commercial test lungs are available, but may be quite expensive, and may not be easy to obtain in the current crisis. Some examples of instrumented test lungs are the Michigan Instruments Model 1600 Test Lung; the IngMar ASL 5000 Breathing Simulator; and the IMT SmartLung. Even uninstrumented simple plastic test lungs may be hard to obtain in some places during the pandemic. If you are working on a ventilator project and have one of these, great! If you don’t, this article is for you. Constructing Your Own Test Lungs Several ways of constructing test lungs with known resistance and compliance are described in the ISO 10651–5 standard for ventilators. It turns out that some of those don’t require any expensive or difficult to obtain materials or equipment. They work as well as the commercial test lungs, and are suitable for certifying designs. To calibrate your test lung, you will need a pressure meter or sensor and a way to take a measurement just inside the throat of the test lung, such as by using a CPAP bleed adapter or some other Y-connector or T-connector that you can seal around your pressure meter. Constructing Compliance from a Glass Vessel Compliance is measured in milliliters/cmH2O. This may be concisely written as just a C-value without the units, and those units are assumed. The typical adult range is around C20 (+-10), mainly depending on body size and physical condition. Compliance may decrease greatly with conditions that cause the lung tissue to stiffen (eg ARDS). Values used in the ISO standards (for adults) are: C50 — large adult C20 — normal C10 — unhealthy lungs : a rigid vessel such as a large glass carboy. The air inside the container acts as a stiff spring. Construction C50 = 72.5 liter (19 gallon) vessel C20 = 29 liter (7.5 gallon) vessel C10 = 14.5 liter (3.8 gallon) vessel (Inexpensive 41.6 liter or 11 gallon test lung, measured compliance C28) (Classic adult test lung from from Hill 1965; the 50 liter or 13 gallon glass demijohn inside a wicker basket on the right is the test lung, the device on the left is a pump) A glass container is probably necessary; most plastic or metal containers of this size may not be rigid enough, and as the walls flex, the C value would change in unpredictable ways. (If you really need to use a plastic container — try one half the size first). The test lung may be composed of several smaller containers linked together. If the containers are linked with valves, this allows easily changing compliance by opening or closing valves. In practice, connecting together two or three of the common 5 or 6 gallon carboys such as used in homebrewing or wine making is a good simulation of adult lungs in the C20-C50 range. (Typical brewing carboys) (Vessels of different sizes: 3 to 14 gallons) Optionally the vessel may be filled with copper mesh, about 1kg (2lb) for the largest size or half that for the smaller sizes. The copper mesh is intended to make the compression of air isothermal by adding a large thermal mass that rapidly equilibrates with the air. If the mesh is omitted, compression is adiabatic instead. The mesh mainly has an effect at very low respiratory rates (0–5 breaths/minute); it is generally not necessary if the test lung is used at normal respiratory rates (>5 breaths/minute). Safety Note These suggested vessels are not pressure rated and may fracture at high pressures. The pressure differences used in normal breathing almost never exceed 1 psi, or 70 cmH2O. Compared to bicycle tires or air-powered tools, this is a tiny pressure. There is never a reason to test higher pressures, which may be dangerous. Do not pressurize over 70cmH2O or 1 psi as such pressures may be both unsafe, and are not realistic for lungs. A pressure limiting valve (pop-off valve) set to 1–2 psi is . Use a basket or a cloth wrapping around the vessel to catch any fragments if it breaks, and . required wear eye protection Constructing Compliance with Plastic Sheets and Bags A 2–3 liter inflatable bag (anesthesia bag or similar) sandwiched between two thin flexible sheets of plastic. The sheets of plastic should be connected together on two opposite edges, forming flat springs. The resistance to air flowing in should come (as much as possible) from the bending of the plastic sheets, not from stretching the bag. The bag would typically inflate only to a thickness of 1–3 cm while in use (in other words it is still mostly flat). Adjust the thickness and length of the plastic to get the right C value (shorter lengths = lower C). A reasonable starting point is to use 12x12 inch, 1/8 inch thick plastic sheets made of HDPE, polypropylene or polycarbonate; but the resulting stiffness of the springs is very dependent on the exact thickness and material, so the dimensions would have to be tuned in each case. (IMT SmartLung — commercial version of a bag between flat plastic springs; adjustable length of spring changes C value. Price: $650) To calibrate, iInject of air using a syringe. Measure the pressure rise immediately after. 500ml C50 should be 10 cmH2O C20 should be 25 cmH2O C10 should be 50 cmH2O Extended calibration: inject air in 100ml increments between 0 and 1000ml; measure the pressure rise and draw a curve. An example calibration curve from the two carboy setup above: Constructing Resistance Because resistance is a function of flow, it is measured in pressure divided by flow, or cmH2O/(liter/second). This may be abbreviated with the letter R and a number without stating the units. The typical adult range is around R5 (+-2). Resistance may increase significantly with any conditions that produce impaired airflow, such as asthma. There are two kinds of resistances, linear (pressure proportional to flow rate) and “parabolic” (pressure proportional to square of flow rate). Linear resistances are harder to construct, so the equivalent parabolic resistances are described below. Values used in the ISO standards (for adults) are: R5 — normal R20 R50 — very high In order to construct a flow resistance that models these values, add a thin plate with a small hole to a standard breathing airway. The international standard for airway diameters is 22mm. (A commercial adapter offering three resistances by having thin plates with 3 different hole sizes.) : tube with inner diameter of approx 22mm and at least 40mm long, blocked by a thin plate with a hole that restricts flow. The hole should have the following diameters: Construction R5 = 7.7 mm R20 = 5.6 mm R50 = 3.9 mm In order to calibrate, connect the resistance to a source of pressurized air, with the other side open to the atmosphere. Adjust flow until it is a steady . Hand-held flow meters are relatively expensive but used in many industries, so you may be able to borrow one. If not, you may have to use a large plastic bag of a known capacity and time how long it takes to fill. Measure the pressure at the inlet to the tube (on the side of the plate the air is coming from). 1 liter per second Compared to the atmospheric pressure in the room, the pressures should be: R5 should be 5 cmH2O nominal (2.7 cmH2O for parabolic) R20 should be 20 cmH2O (17.6 cmH2O for parabolic) R50 should be 50 cmH2O (6.8 cmH2O for parabolic, measured at 0.25 liters per second) (note: the specs for parabolic resistance above come from an older standard, ASTM F920–93, table A2.2) In order to perform extended calibration adjust flow to 0.25, 0.5 and 1 liters per second, measure the pressure at each flow and draw a curve. The actual value is likely to be different due to small changes in geometry, etc. Adjust the hole size if needed, or simply use several different sizes with known measured R-values for testing. Other approaches When it comes to simulating lungs, the perhaps obvious DIY approach is to use some kind of expandable or inflatable bag, balloon or similar. This is then loaded in some way e.g. with elastic bands, weights, or by being put under water to make it harder to push air in. The problem with these approaches is that the pressure vs volume curves they have is completely different from the one that the standard test lungs (and real lungs) have. Most elastic bags are not nearly stiff enough; for example anaesthesia bags are much stiffer than balloons, but are still not stiff enough until over-inflated to 2x-5x their rated volume; and additionally, the stiffness changes a great deal once they stretch. Weights, water and similar static loads add a minimum pressure which is required to push any air in; they offset the pressure vs volume curve, rather than changing the slope. Springs, elastic bands and so forth do change the slope, but not in a consistent way — for most of these the slope gets much steeper as the volume gets higher. Trying to measure the R and C values, especially C, is meaningless because the shape of the curve is wrong. This may lead to very misleading conclusions when testing a ventilator prototype. Conclusion It is much more important to have a test lung which behaves in a realistic way, and for which the R and C values are known and within the expected range for real lungs, than it is to have specific R and C values or to use a commercial test lung. Even if a commercial test lung is not available, it is strongly recommended to use the of construction described here — even if the specific sizes or volumes are slightly different — for all but the simplest tests of ventilator function. types Public Invention is a US 501(c)3 public charity. Your supports are attempt to foster tested, reliable, and monitored open-source pandemic ventilators. Public Invention donation References International Standards Organisation. ISO 10651–5–2006 Lung ventilators for medical use — Particular requirements for basic safety and essential performance — Part 5: Gas-powered emergency resuscitators. https://www.iso.org/standard/35975.html Hill DW, Moore V. The action of adiabatic effects on the compliance of an artificial thorax. BJA: British Journal of Anaesthesia. 1965 Jan 1;37(1):19–22. https://academic.oup.com/bja/article/37/1/19/276686 Chatburn RL. Simulation studies for device evaluation. Respiratory care. 2014 Apr 1;59(4):e61–6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261515819_Simulation_Studies_for_Device_Evaluation Kenny JE. ICU Physiology in 1000 Words: Shorthand Equations for Respiratory System Power. Jonson B, Svantesson C. Elastic pressure–volume curves: what information do they convey?. Thorax. 1999 Jan 1;54(1):82–7.

How To Make Your Own Test Lungs for Testing Emergency Ventilators

The Building Blocks of UI/UX: How Atomic Design Transforms Your Workflow

Stellar Community Fund Drives Innovation in Blockchain Development The Stellar Community Fund (SCF) is set to launch Cohort 9 of its Kickstart Program, providing developers and founders with an exceptional opportunity to build, launch, and scale their projects on the Stellar network. Since the launch of the Soroban smart contract platform in May, the Kickstart Program is also open to builders working on DeFi projects and other decentralized applications. Applications for the Kickstart program are now open and will close on November 17, 2024, with the program running from December 2-6, 2024. Kickstart Program - 5-Day Virtual Accelerator The SCF Kickstart program is a structured, five-day virtual boot camp that provides early-stage developers and founders with hands-on mentorship and a path to potentially access funding from the Stellar Community Fund. This program is specifically designed for participants who have a concept and want to transform their ideas into tangible projects built on Stellar. Each day of the program focuses on a key development area: December 2, 2024 - Define Your Minimum Viable Product
December 3, 2024 - Create a UI/UX Mockup
December 4, 2024 - Outline Technical Architecture
December 5, 2024 - Develop a Go-to-Market Strategy
December 6, 2024 - Pitch Your Product to Industry Experts After completing the Kickstart boot camp, developers can apply for the SCF Kickstart Award, potentially earning up to USD $15,000* in XLM to validate and develop their projects. Projects that demonstrate initial traction may then become eligible for the SCF Build Award. Build Program - Roadmap To Launch The SCF Build Program supports projects that have moved beyond the concept phase and are ready to scale toward market launch. Offering up to USD $150,000* in XLM, this award assists teams with development costs, community integration, and resources needed to finalize their products. The Build Program benefits include: Financial Support - Up to six months of development costs
Access to Stellar LaunchKit - Includes audit credits, infrastructure offers, and additional funding mechanisms
Community Integration - Stellar actively supports partners and developers on the network To apply, teams must submit a detailed proposal outlining their project goals, budget, and how they meet eligibility criteria. The application process includes community voting and a panel evaluation, with funding distributed in tranches based on development milestones, ensuring projects stay on track. How To Apply Developers interested in joining the Kickstart program can apply at: https://communityfund.stellar.org/kickstart. Following the November 17th, 2024 deadline, selected participants will receive preparation materials and guidance from the Stellar Development Foundation and the SCF team. Teams that complete the Kickstart program and demonstrate project potential will have the option to scale further with the SCF Build Award. The USD valuation of the budget request in XLM will be calculated using the CF Stellar Lumens-Dollar Settlement Price on the day of payment as administered, maintained, and reported by the cryptocurrency index provider CF Benchmarks Ltd. (using the ticker XLMUSD_RR) (available at https://www.cfbenchmarks.com/indices/XLMUSD_RR). Learn more in the SCF Handbook. Stellar Community Fund Drives Innovation in Blockchain Development The Stellar Community Fund (SCF) is set to launch Cohort 9 of its Kickstart Program, providing developers and founders with an exceptional opportunity to build, launch, and scale their projects on the Stellar network. Since the launch of the Soroban smart contract platform in May, the Kickstart Program is also open to builders working on DeFi projects and other decentralized applications. Stellar Community Fund (SCF) Stellar Community Fund (SCF) Soroban smart contract platform Soroban smart contract platform Applications for the Kickstart program are now open and will close on November 17, 2024, with the program running from December 2-6, 2024. Kickstart Program - 5-Day Virtual Accelerator The SCF Kickstart program is a structured, five-day virtual boot camp that provides early-stage developers and founders with hands-on mentorship and a path to potentially access funding from the Stellar Community Fund. This program is specifically designed for participants who have a concept and want to transform their ideas into tangible projects built on Stellar . Stellar Stellar Each day of the program focuses on a key development area: December 2, 2024 - Define Your Minimum Viable Product December 3, 2024 - Create a UI/UX Mockup December 4, 2024 - Outline Technical Architecture December 5, 2024 - Develop a Go-to-Market Strategy December 6, 2024 - Pitch Your Product to Industry Experts December 2, 2024 - Define Your Minimum Viable Product December 3, 2024 - Create a UI/UX Mockup December 4, 2024 - Outline Technical Architecture December 5, 2024 - Develop a Go-to-Market Strategy December 6, 2024 - Pitch Your Product to Industry Experts After completing the Kickstart boot camp, developers can apply for the SCF Kickstart Award, potentially earning up to USD $15,000* in XLM to validate and develop their projects. Projects that demonstrate initial traction may then become eligible for the SCF Build Award. Build Program - Roadmap To Launch The SCF Build Program supports projects that have moved beyond the concept phase and are ready to scale toward market launch. Offering up to USD $150,000* in XLM, this award assists teams with development costs, community integration, and resources needed to finalize their products. SCF Build Program SCF Build Program The Build Program benefits include: Financial Support - Up to six months of development costs Access to Stellar LaunchKit - Includes audit credits, infrastructure offers, and additional funding mechanisms Community Integration - Stellar actively supports partners and developers on the network Financial Support - Up to six months of development costs Access to Stellar LaunchKit - Includes audit credits, infrastructure offers, and additional funding mechanisms Community Integration - Stellar actively supports partners and developers on the network To apply, teams must submit a detailed proposal outlining their project goals, budget, and how they meet eligibility criteria. The application process includes community voting and a panel evaluation, with funding distributed in tranches based on development milestones, ensuring projects stay on track. How To Apply Developers interested in joining the Kickstart program can apply at: https://communityfund.stellar.org/kickstart. https://communityfund.stellar.org/kickstart . https://communityfund.stellar.org/kickstart Following the November 17th, 2024 deadline, selected participants will receive preparation materials and guidance from the Stellar Development Foundation and the SCF team. Teams that complete the Kickstart program and demonstrate project potential will have the option to scale further with the SCF Build Award. Stellar Development Foundation Stellar Development Foundation The USD valuation of the budget request in XLM will be calculated using the CF Stellar Lumens-Dollar Settlement Price on the day of payment as administered, maintained, and reported by the cryptocurrency index provider CF Benchmarks Ltd. (using the ticker XLMUSD_RR) (available at https://www.cfbenchmarks.com/indices/XLMUSD_RR). Learn more in the SCF Handbook. The USD valuation of the budget request in XLM will be calculated using the CF Stellar Lumens-Dollar Settlement Price on the day of payment as administered, maintained, and reported by the cryptocurrency index provider CF Benchmarks Ltd. (using the ticker XLMUSD_RR) (available at https://www.cfbenchmarks.com/indices/XLMUSD_RR ). Learn more in the SCF Handbook . https://www.cfbenchmarks.com/indices/XLMUSD_RR https://www.cfbenchmarks.com/indices/XLMUSD_RR SCF Handbook SCF Handbook

Can The Stellar Accelerator Kickstart Your Web3 Idea?

Може ли Stellar Accelerator да стартира вашата Web3 идея?

¿Puede el acelerador Stellar impulsar su idea Web3?

L’accélérateur Stellar peut-il donner un coup de fouet à votre idée Web3 ?

Կարո՞ղ է Stellar Accelerator-ը սկսել ձեր Web3 գաղափարը:

Stellar Accelerator は Web3 のアイデアを始動させることができますか?

Na The Stellar Accelerator e ka Kickstart Kgopolo ya Gago ya Web3?

Czy akcelerator Stellar może dać początek Twojemu pomysłowi na Web3?

Dardariyaha Stellar ma bilaabi karaa fikradaada Web3?

Може ли Стеллар Аццелератор покренути вашу Веб3 идеју?

“Stellar Accelerator” Web3 ideýaňyzy başlap bilermi?

Stellar Accelerator Web3 Fikrinizi Harekete Geçirebilir mi?

Ngaba i-Stellar Accelerator iyakwazi ukuqala imbono yakho yeWeb3?

An outsider’s perspective on how to do Product Launches, choices to make and lessons learned: What is and what it can do for you ProductHunt Goals you should aim for Preparing for the launch Things to do on the big day Tips and insights WHAT WAYDEV DOES — Software Development Metrics for non-techies Looks at source control statistics and condenses them into an easy-to follow number that can tell you, at a glance, if the project is on track This is a case study for a product with a For a broader audience, scale up the numbers very specific audience. Nobody will find your product unless you get featured — What it means? GETTING FEATURED — Defining a successful launch OBJECTIVES Making the top 10 is useful — Y ou can make the top 10 in any category and, ideally, also globally. This will help generate traction and, later on, be useful in attracting investors It’s not just about time — You of course also need views and upvotes, and as many new users as your system can handle. Which sometimes happens to be less than expected, for some reason Being in the gives you an additional week of visibility top 10 — If you remember a single slide, this one should be it LAUNCHING ON PH Creating it and how it helps THE UPCOMING PAGE WITH SHIP — Features you might need CREATE UPCOMING PAGE WITH SHIP — Getting a good start USING THE UPCOMING PAGE — Build an MVP Now it makes sense to Getting the most out of what you built MANAGE THE MVP — PREPARING THE LAUNCH Give yourself enough time, but also push yourself SET THE DATE — — Good writing increases your chances for success MATERIALS YOU NEED — Remind them that the thing they’re interested in is about to launch MESSAGE UPCOMING SUBSCRIBERS with Ship THE LAUNCH DAY STAYING ON TOP OF THE ISSUES — A tradeoff between potential reach and competition IDEALLY IT’S A TUESDAY — Prepare a response HAVE A FIRST COMMENT READY — Keep your users informed and tackle difficult questions BE ACTIVE IN THE COMMENTS — Keep your application running BE READY TO TACKLE ISSUES — Be ready to answer questions and fix problems in real-time PROVIDE TECH SUPPORT MISCELLANEOUS — TIPS THINGS WE’VE LEARNED AND FIND USEFUL This case study was possible with the support of company & from Product Hunt who provided us early access to . Johnny Modest Nick Abouzeid Ship

A case study on Waydev’s Product Hunt Launch 🚀 with Ship 🚢

Court documents reveal how the late Apple CEO won over News Corp. on eBook pricing. The US government’s price-fixing lawsuit against Apple goes to trial next month in New York. Ahead of its court date, that purport to show Apple was the “ ” in a scheme to set artificially high ebook prices with some of the largest American publishers, which have already settled the case. the US released emails ringleader — This story helped me to negotiate hard at , I hope it will help you the same. Waydev The emails have mostly been viewed in the context of the lawsuit, but they also provide an extraordinary view of high-stakes negotiation between the leaders of two powerful firms, Apple and News Corp. They start far apart, but over the course of five days, Apple’s then-CEO Steve Jobs successfully pulls the son of News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch over to his side. Jobs was a famously hard-nosed negotiator who won these kinds of battles all the time. Before book publishers, there was the movie industry. And before that, music record labels. But most of those negotiations were hidden from view. What follows are the emails released last week along with some context; spelling and grammar have been preserved from the originals. News Corp.’s Opening Move It was a Friday morning, January 22, 2010. Apple was preparing to release its newest product, a long-rumored tablet computer, the following week. Part of the iPad’s appeal was supposed to be the vast array of media that could be consumed on it, but one of the largest American publishers, HarperCollins, was holding out from signing a deal to sell its ebooks in Apple’s iTunes store. Those were the stakes as Eddy Cue, Apple’s head of iTunes and the App Store, visited executives of HarperCollins and its parent company, News Corp. The substance of that meeting was conveyed in an email sent to Cue later that day by Brian Murray, the CEO of HarperCollins. It detailed the publisher’s opening bid in the negotiation, with five days remaining until the iPad’s unveiling. Eddy, Thanks for coming in again this morning. We’ve talked over the proposal and I want to make sure that you have a summary of the deal that HarperCollins would be willing to do in your timeframe. 1. Pricing: We need flexibility to price on a title by title basis outside the prescribed tiers in the contract. We will use our best efforts to meet the tiers we discussed. 2. MFN [“most favored nation” status]: In the event that HarperCollins and Apple disagree on a consumer price for a title, HarperCollins needs the ability to make that title available through other agents who support the higher price. 3. Commissions: We need a lower commission on new releases for the economics to work for us and our authors. We believe a 30% commission will lead to more authors asking for ebooks to be delayed a result that will not work for Apple or HarperCollins. 4. The new release window: We need to have flexibility on the agency window. We believe this window should be 6 months rather than 12 months in the event that one or more large retailers do not move to an agency model. Leslie will be sending Kevin a contract that reflects these points in the event you wish to move forward on these terms. ThanksBrian Those terms were never going to fly with Apple, which had successfully signed deals with HarperCollins’s rivals, like Penguin (a division of Pearson) and Simon & Schuster (part of Viacom). Those deals would allow Apple to set prices for new ebooks at $12.99 — three dollars higher than the typical rate at that time on Amazon — and take a 30% cut of each sale. But HarperCollins wanted the freedom to set its own prices and worried that $12.99 per ebook would hurt its sales on the new iPad as well as the Kindle. It also didn’t want to give up 30%. To back up its position, James Murdoch, a high-ranking News Corp. executive, forwarded Murray’s email to Apple’s then-CEO Steve Jobs, and included the following note. It was still Friday. Steve, Thanks for your call earlier today, and for the time last week. I spoke to Brian Murray and Jon Miller [then the head of digital media at News Corp.] — and Brian is sending a note to Eddy today. I thin I have a handle on this now. In short — we we would like to be able to get something done with Apple — but there are legitimate concerns. The economics are simple enough. [Amazon] Kindle pays us a wholesale price of $13 and sells it for 9.99. An author gets $4.20 on the sale of a hardcover and $3.30 on the sale of the e-book on the Kindle. [A portion of this email was redacted by the court.] Basically — the entire hypothetical benefit of a book without raw materials and distribution cost accrues to Apple, not to the publisher or to the creator of the work. The other big issue is one of holdbacks. If we can’t agree on the fair price for a book, your team’s proposal restricts us from making that book available elsewhere, even at a higher price. This is just a bridge too far for us. Also, we are worried about setting prices to high — lots of ebooks are $9.99. A new release window with a lower commission (say 10[%]) for the first six months would enable us to proce much more kenly for Apple customers. We’d like to da that. More on this below in Brian’s note to Eddy. We outline a deal we can do. Feel free to call or write anytime over the weekend to discuss if you like. I am in the UK (so eight hours ahead of CA). My home number is [redacted]. I check the email regularly. Steve, make no mistake that across the board (TV, Studios, Books, and Newspapers) we would much rather be working with apple than not. But we, and our partners who produce, write, edit, and otherwise make all this with us, have views on fair pricing, and care a lot about our future flexibility. I hope we can figure out a way, if not now and in time for this launch of yours, then maybe in the future. Best,JRM Jobs Digs In Jobs wasn’t willing to compromise. He sent this reply to Murdoch the same day, arguing that Amazon’s pricing wasn’t sustainable and would train people to think that ebooks were cheap. Jobs also reminded Murdoch of Apple’s vast reach — “over 120 million customers with credit cards on file.” You need us more than we need you, he seemed to be saying. James, A few thoughts to consider (I’d appreciate it if we can keep this between you and me): 1. The current business model of companies like Amazon distributing ebooks below cost or without making a reasonable profit isn’t sustainable for long. As ebooks become a larger business, distributors will need to make at least a small profit, and you will want this too so that they invest in the future of the business with infrastructure, marketing, etc. 2. All the major publishers tell us that Amazon’s $9.99 price for new releases is eroding the value perception of their products in customer’s minds, and they do not want this practice to continue for new releases. 3. Apple is proposing to give the cost benefits of a book without raw materials, distribution, remaindering, cost of capital, bad debt, etc., to the customer, not Apple. This is why a new release would be priced at $12.99, say, instead of $16.99 or even higher. Apple doesn’t want to make more than the slim profit margin it makes distributing music, movies, etc. 4. $9 per new release should represent a gross margin neutral business model for the publishers. We are not asking them to make any less money. As for the artists, giving them the same amount of royalty as they make today, leaving the publisher with the same profits, is as easy as sending them all a letter telling them that you are paying them a higher percentage for ebooks. They won’t be sad. 5. Analysts estimate that Amazon has sold more than one million Kindles in 18+ months (Amazon has never said). We will sell more of our new devices than all of the Kindles ever sold during the first few weeks they are on sale. If you stick with just Amazon, Sony, etc., you will likely be sitting on the sidelines of the mainstream ebook revolution. 6. Customers will demand an end-to-end solution, meaning an online bookstore that carries the books, handles the transactions with their credit cards, and delivers the books seamlessly to their device. So far, there are only two companies who have demonstrated online stores with significant transaction volume — Apple and Amazon. Apple’s iTunes Store and App Store have over 120 million customers with credit cards on file and have downloaded over 12 billion products. This is the type of online assets that will be required to scale the ebook business into something that matters to the publishers. So, yes, getting around $9 per new release is less than the $12.50 or so that Amazon is currently paying. But the current situation is not sustainable and not a strong foundation upon which to build an ebook business. [A portion of this email was redacted by the court.] Apple is the only other company currently capable of making a serious impact, and we have 4 of the 6 big publishers signed up already. Once we open things up for the second tier of publishers, we will have plenty of books to offer. We’d love to have HC among them. Thanks for listening. Steve Murdoch Starts to Bend Murdoch’s reply came the following afternoon, Saturday, January 23. Jobs had made clear that Apple wouldn’t budge. Murdoch was about to indicate that HarperCollins would. He proposed two possible compromises, then noted that News Corp. and Apple were negotiating on a number of fronts. “Is it worth considering in the round, over the next few months or weeks, whether or not some of these loose ends can be tidied up?” Murdoch wrote. The iPad announcement was four days away. Steve, I think the crux of this is our flexibility to offer product elsewhere at price-points you don’t like. If we could offer to you that a certain percentage of releases (>50%) would be available within your pricing structure (< or = 14.99), does that give you enough comfort? I think we are worried more about the absolute holdback of product elsewhere, and our ceding of pricing to Apple, than we are about the actual haggle over what the price will be. I haven’t shared this with HC directly — so this is only hypothetical. But if you were willing to accept that a supplier can exploit other avenues (at prices not disadvantageous to you), with a guarantee of substantial volume through Apple — maybe I could work with HC to get to some common ground. Please let me know. A different question: we have four areas of discussion (related to our product) between our teams right now: Books, US Video, Int’l Video, and newspapers. All at different stages of maturity, these discussions are all centered, for us, around the desire to make our product widely available, and to make yours and our products more attractive for our customers. It seems though that we in each one we largely encounter a “take it or leave it” set of terms, and predictably we’ve so far failed to really strike the kind of partnerships that could move things forward. Is it worth considering in the round, over the next few months or weeks, whether or not some of these loose ends can be tidied up? It’s clear that Apple is already becoming an attractive platform for so many of our customers — all over the world. As a creative company at our core, NWS [News Corp.] should be more engaged with Apple, and I think Apple could be more engaged with NWS, globally, than either of us are today. Best,JRM Jobs Goes in for the Kill With Murdoch indicating that HarperCollins was willing to compromise, Jobs pressed harder. “As I see it, HC has the following choices,” he wrote in a reply to Murdoch the following morning, Sunday, January 24. Jobs outlined three stark choices. Accept our terms, he was saying, or good luck with Amazon. “Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see any other alternatives,” Jobs wrote, almost daring Murdoch to spurn Apple. “Do you?” James, Our proposal does set the upper limit for ebook retail pricing based on the hardcover price of each book. The reason we are doing this is that, with our experience selling a lot of content online, we simply don’t think the ebook market can be successful with pricing higher than $12.99 or $14.99. Heck, Amazon is selling these books at $9.99, and who knows, maybe they are right and we will fail even at $12.99. But we’re willing to try at the prices we’ve proposed. We are not willing to try at higher prices because we are pretty sure we’ll all fail. As I see it, HC has the following choices: 1. Throw in with Apple and see if we can all make a go of this to create a real mainstream ebooks market at $12.99 and $14.99. 2. Keep going with Amazon at $9.99. You will make a bit more money in the short term, but in the medium term Amazon will tell you they will be paying you 70% of $9.99. They have shareholders too. 3. Hold back your books from Amazon. Without a way for customers to buy your ebooks, they will steal them. This will be the start of piracy and once started there will be no stopping it. Trust me, I’ve seen this happen with my own eyes. Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see any other alternatives. Do you? Regards,Steve On Tuesday, a day before the iPad announcement, HarperCollins agreed to Apple’s terms. The publisher’s ebooks were included in the iBookstore unveiled on January 27 along with new tablet, more than 100 million of which have now been sold. Original article: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/05/the-steve-jobs-emails-that-show-how-to-win-a-hard-nosed-negotiation/276136/

How Steve Jobs negotiated with James Murdoch

Stories, News & Mentions about CMMATERIALS

Cmmaterials’s Stories on HackerNoon