AfterDawn: Tech news

Amazon to allow customers to remove "special offers" ads from new Kindles for a price

Written by Andre Yoskowitz (Google+) @ 06 Oct 2011 23:32 User comments (11)

Amazon to allow customers to remove "special offers" ads from new Kindles for a price Earlier this month, Amazon announced its new line of Kindle e-readers, including Touch models and their long-awaited tablet, the Kindle Fire.
Perhaps equally as notable was the pricing on the devices, including a new low, $79, for the new Wi-Fi Kindle (non-touch). The price is so low because the device includes Amazon's "special offers" ads, ads that scroll when the device is turned on and during screen savers but never during reading or shopping.

Amazon has noted today that users can pay up to have those ads removed permanently, for the price of $30 (the difference in price of the non-special-offers Kindle).

The process is easy and can be done from your Amazon account page. Hit the "Manage your Kindle" tab and then the "Manage your Devices" option. From there simply unsubscribe from Special Offers and you will be charged $30.

Removing the Special Offers is only available on the brand-new keyboard-less $79 Kindle and the $99 Kindle Touch.

Previous Next  

11 user comments

17.10.2011 1:27

ROOT!!!!!!



27.10.2011 12:51

Quite the little extortionist ploy. How much do you want to bet they'll still sneak in an ad or two despite the fact you coughed/gagged/sodomy victim the $30 for no ads anyway? You know they will. They'll simply claim it's their machine, their content & their prerogative & you can simply go with another provider.

It will simply be a matter of time before they pull that one.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 07 Oct 2011 @ 12:52

37.10.2011 14:16

Hmmm, as it stands I won't need to pay $30 to stop the ads, a better approach seems not to buy a K1nd1e. Save both the purchase and special offer price.

47.10.2011 16:34

Who cares. The ads only show up on the screen when you turn it off. Maybe if they let you put your own images that might be worth something (not $30), but I don't think I even spend 1 second looking at that screen. I pretty much turn it on before I even look at it.

And no, it is not an ipad. It is GREAT for reading though. That is pretty much all it's good for. I love reading and I love the Kindle.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 07 Oct 2011 @ 16:36

57.10.2011 20:01

I think it's a good option. You can get the Kindle for the lower price, but then if you decide that you really don't want the ads then you can pay the difference to turn it into the ad free version. That way if you end up regretting your decision to go with the ad sponsored one, you aren't stuck with that decision. If you don't want the ads at all, then buy the more expensive version to begin with. I really wouldn't ever see them but for a brief instant, so I would probably go with the cheaper version if I ever have to replace my Kindle. I have a cover for mine, so it's closed as soon as I finish reading.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 07 Oct 2011 @ 20:02

68.10.2011 5:58

I would just use AdFree...that way you don't get ads from anyone...paying amazon $30 only turns off the amazon ads, not the ones built into apps and websites.



724.2.2012 2:28

Originally posted by LordRuss:
Quite the little extortionist ploy. How much do you want to bet they'll still sneak in an ad or two despite the fact you coughed/gagged/sodomy victim the $30 for no ads anyway? You know they will. They'll simply claim it's their machine, their content & their prerogative & you can simply go with another provider.

It will simply be a matter of time before they pull that one.
I fail to see how it is an extortionist ploy. From what I understand, they offer two versions of this device, one with ads, and one without ads. The one with ads is cheaper, because its cost is subsidized by its ads. The one without ads costs more, as it is *not* subsidized.

824.2.2012 12:40

Originally posted by phobet:
Originally posted by LordRuss:
Quite the little extortionist ploy. How much do you want to bet they'll still sneak in an ad or two despite the fact you coughed/gagged/sodomy victim the $30 for no ads anyway? You know they will. They'll simply claim it's their machine, their content & their prerogative & you can simply go with another provider.

It will simply be a matter of time before they pull that one.
I fail to see how it is an extortionist ploy. From what I understand, they offer two versions of this device, one with ads, and one without ads. The one with ads is cheaper, because its cost is subsidized by its ads. The one without ads costs more, as it is *not* subsidized.
You're 6 months off topic & it's been documented that they do already indeed slip in a couple of ads anyway. Your argument kind of became invalid as nobody decided to argue about it.
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 24 Feb 2012 @ 12:41

92.3.2012 18:22

Originally posted by LordRuss:
Originally posted by phobet:
Originally posted by LordRuss:
Quite the little extortionist ploy. How much do you want to bet they'll still sneak in an ad or two despite the fact you coughed/gagged/sodomy victim the $30 for no ads anyway? You know they will. They'll simply claim it's their machine, their content & their prerogative & you can simply go with another provider.

It will simply be a matter of time before they pull that one.
I fail to see how it is an extortionist ploy. From what I understand, they offer two versions of this device, one with ads, and one without ads. The one with ads is cheaper, because its cost is subsidized by its ads. The one without ads costs more, as it is *not* subsidized.
You're 6 months off topic & it's been documented that they do already indeed slip in a couple of ads anyway. Your argument kind of became invalid as nobody decided to argue about it.
I'm sorry for going against you. I guess I rubbed you the wrong way, six months off topic and all. But then again, *you* felt that this would not fly until I was "corrected" in my ways. So it still is a valid argument, *dispite* its being in disagreement with you. Thank you for the correction, I fell much better knowing that I am flying correctly, now. And as a junior member, I shall strive to be a much better Padawan to a senior member such as yourself.

103.3.2012 19:09

Originally posted by phobet:

I'm sorry for going against you. I guess I rubbed you the wrong way, six months off topic and all. But then again, *you* felt that this would not fly until I was "corrected" in my ways. So it still is a valid argument, *dispite* its being in disagreement with you. Thank you for the correction, I fell much better knowing that I am flying correctly, now. And as a junior member, I shall strive to be a much better Padawan to a senior member such as yourself.
I play a tune upon my bottom lip... for it's no one other than us in here...

114.3.2012 2:08

Originally posted by LordRuss:


I play a tune upon my bottom lip... for it's no one other than us in here...
Mmmmm...kay...

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive