Tor delays new-release sales to library ebook supplier Overdrive

[John F]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

I thought a library borrow is nearly as expensive (to the library) as a sale when it comes to ebooks and Overdrive. Or am I missing something?

I don't think it is that bad ("nearly as expensive"), but as I recall, it can be much* more expensive than the library buying a pbook and lending it.


* for someone's definition of "much".

[Sarmat89]

Say thanks to the pirates.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by John F

I don't think it is that bad ("nearly as expensive"), but as I recall, it can be much* more expensive than the library buying a pbook and lending it.


* for someone's definition of "much".

Library bound pbooks from vendors that supply libraries are quite expensive (a multiple of the hardcover). The library has to manage very closely to match funds with demand. My guess would be that the budget for new releases is simply going elsewhere. The books that delay simply miss out on a massive buy from libraries across the country. Maybe it will generate a few extra sales from the ones that must have it, but I doubt it will offset the loss from libraries. What happens after the artificial embargo? Meh, not a new release anymore, no justifiable demand. The libraries money will be spent on real new releases.

A new to me car is still used, not matter how much the sales jerk wants to call it "previously owned" to lessen the effect.

[Tarana]

Originally Posted by Sarmat89

Say thanks to the pirates.

Pirates aren't to blame for everything. Fewer people are reading. They have many other things to do with their time. 20 years ago, more than half of the elderly in my late grandmother's senior building read at least a few books a year. Now it is barely 10%. I include in that 10% those who read ebooks, dead tree and audiobooks.

This building is a microcosm of my community because you have to have lived in the county for at least 10 years to qualify as a resident (and be 65 or over).

Also, because there are fewer readers, it's a lot easier to pick up quality used paperbacks at garage sales and used book stores due to less competition.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Tarana

Pirates aren't to blame for everything. Fewer people are reading. They have many other things to do with their time. 20 years ago, more than half of the elderly in my late grandmother's senior building read at least a few books a year. Now it is barely 10%. I include in that 10% those who read ebooks, dead tree and audiobooks.

Quite so. Besides ... if Tor were making this decision because of book-pirates, wouldn't they have just ended their DRM-Free policy?

No, it's clear that piracy has no bearing on this decision whatsoever. Tor/MacMillan clearly believes (or wants to believe) that honest, library patrons are cutting into their potential new-release ebook sales. Right or wrong, the motivation is plain--and it ain't piracy.

[Fbone]

Macmillan's licensing terms were rather generous for libraries. In 2013 they were $25 for 52 lends.

Perhaps, Macmillan thought it best to delay new releases instead of changing terms.

[darryl]

Nate's picked up the story on his blog, which reminded me of a couple of aspects I meant to comment on and didn't. It is quite reasonable to wish to quantify the effect of making new releases immediately available in libraries on sales. However, an open ended trial is a trifle unusual and could be used to mask what is in effect a more permanent change of policy. Please note my use of the word could in this regard. And secondly, as Nate pointed out, there is little mystery why MacMillan ebook sales are steadily declining. And it is not because of library books.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Blossom

If I remember right Penguin did this many years ago.

Amazon Publishing does it currently. But rather than having a four month wait period, they seems to plan to never allow sale or leasing of their popular books for public library eBook borrowing.

Example:

https://www.overdrive.com/search?q=B...+a+Scarlet+Sky

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by Fbone

Macmillan's licensing terms were rather generous for libraries. In 2013 they were $25 for 52 lends.

Perhaps, Macmillan thought it best to delay new releases instead of changing terms.

Most current terms from Macmillan that I've got recorded (as of 2016) are...

Library lending terms:
All titles are available
for a two-year/52-lend
period (whichever
comes first).

Library pricing:
Titles published less than 12
months ago: $60.
Titles published 12 months
ago or more: $40.


Imprints include Farrar Straus
and Giroux, Henry Holt & Company, W.H.
Freeman and Worth Publishers, Palgrave
Macmillan, Bedford/St. Martin’s, Picador,
Roaring Brook Press, St. Martin’s Press,
Tor Books, and Macmillan Higher
Education.

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

Most current terms from Macmillan that I've got recorded (as of 2016) are...

Thanks for the update. My library doesn't purchase Macmillan/Tor ebooks. They prefer those with near unlimited licenses.

[ottdmk]

Libraries get ripped off by the large publishers when it comes to e-books. Pretty much all of them a) charge substantially more for the file to a library then a consumer and b) impose an expiration date of some sort.

The publishers claim this is because e-books don't bring in replacement sales like p-books do... but it's been shown, quite clearly, that replacement sales at libraries are actually quite insignificant.

Really annoys me, because I really enjoy borrowing epubs through Overdrive from my local library...

[haertig]

I don't think I've ever bought a new release in my life. And not even a hardcover ... until it's been out forever and can be found in the Barnes & Noble super discount shelves at the front of the store. Otherwise, it's a paperback for me, preferably a used one (these days).

I have enough paperbacks and ebooks in my "to be read pile" to keep me busy until the day I die (if I happen to live until I'm 175 years old, that is). Even if I cull my stockpile down to only the ones I might realistically ever read (there are many that I know I'll never open!), then I still have enough to keep me going until I'm 117 years old. By then, I'll probably be so senile as to be more likely to eat them than read them.

So this experiment won't be affecting me in the slightest.

[darryl]

The only ones potentially affected (more than simple inconvenience) are those who must read it right now and so immediately either buy the full price (usually overpriced) ebook or the paper book (in the case of a new release usually an expensive hardback but which may be available at some discount). Not affected at all (apart from the said inconvenience) are those prepared to do without altogether, wait, or download a pirate copy. Guess which option many seeking instant gratification are going to choose?

I'm also going to raise another point which is sometimes mentioned but too often overlooked. EBooks are a must for some older people and many with vision problems. Even many who are able to read print books are able to read far more comfortably with ebooks. For at least some people this is a real accessibility issue.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by darryl

The only ones potentially affected (more than simple inconvenience) are those who must read it right now and so immediately either buy the full price (usually overpriced) ebook or the paper book (in the case of a new release usually an expensive hardback but which may be available at some discount). Not affected at all (apart from the said inconvenience) are those prepared to do without altogether, wait, or download a pirate copy. Guess which option many seeking instant gratification are going to choose?

I'm also going to raise another point which is sometimes mentioned but too often overlooked. EBooks are a must for some older people and many with vision problems. Even many who are able to read print books are able to read far more comfortably with ebooks. For at least some people this is a real accessibility issue.

They can still buy the books as ebooks, they just can't borrow them from the library as ebooks for the first several months. It sounds like you are trying to frame this from a moral point of view. I have a hard time accepting the premise that anyone has a moral right to free stuff, especially when it's more free stuff right now, rather than in a few months.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

They can still buy the books as ebooks, they just can't borrow them from the library as ebooks for the first several months. It sounds like you are trying to frame this from a moral point of view. I have a hard time accepting the premise that anyone has a moral right to free stuff, especially when it's more free stuff right now, rather than in a few months.

Moreover, books are pretty fungible. There's always something else to read.

Originally Posted by darryl

The only ones potentially affected (more than simple inconvenience) are those who must read it right now

(Emphasis mine)

What does "must" really mean in this context? "Really, really want to a lot"? That's not the imperative you'd like it to be. If they truly "must", they have to find a way to pay for it if they're honest. It's not the moral equivalent of stealing a loaf of bread when you're starving.