Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg
Why is it that Hachette is getting criticized for past conduct when Amazon Publishing gets a pass for current behavior?
|
I'm happy to criticize Amazon Publishing for not selling their ebooks to libraries, but you implied that Hachette plays nice with libraries which is hardly the case. Since they wouldn't license frontlist ebooks to libraries for 2 years, there are only a small number of Hachette ebooks at most libraries.
Clarification, not championing Amazon was the reason I posted. I actively try and reward Random House and HarperCollins by purchasing most of my ebooks from them since they have always allowed libraries access to their entire catalog. I avoid Amazon Publishing imprints the same way I avoid Hachette (and Penguin and Macmillan and S&S), only purchasing when deep discounts tempt me.
Quote:
|
If I was on the library board, I'd argue that the eBook is worth much more to us than the paper book because the electronic copy doesn't occupy rented or mortgaged space, and doesn't require heating, air conditioning, roof repairs to keep it dry, costs of cataloging and checkout, costs associated with patron theft, etc. Now, if the eBook price is high enough, it still could be a worse value than paper. But without calculating the total direct and indirect cost per borrowing, and comparing that to what the library is charged for the book, you can't just assume that the overall value of the eBook title is worse.
|
I suspect the price set by the publisher has nothing to do with value and is intended to keep the number of copies available to loan low and the waiting lists long. Creating artificial scarcity is a way of increasing the friction involved with borrowing ebooks. The libraries haven't been shy in complaining that there isn't enough friction involved with digital libraries.