Library E-Book Lending Poses Rising Problem for Publishing Industry

[haertig]

I'm not sure why all the arguments/discussion over which is better. I have a tablet, a smartphone (recent purchase), an eInk reader, and a Sansa Clip mp3 player. I use ALL of them, choosing whichever one I like best for a particular task. They are not mutually exclusive.

I prefer reading novels on my eInk device, I prefer surfing the web and handling email on my tablet (actually on my desktop computer, but the tablet fills in when I'm mobile), I prefer listening to audiobooks on my mp3 player, and I prefer making phone calls on my smart phone (duh!)

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I know B&N bought Fictionwise. But Fictionwise was still working with their successful business model until agency killed Fictionwise's business model. I am not saying that Fictionwise was more successful then Amazon. But they were quite successful witht he way they sold eBooks.

Fictionwise made money because they were good at what they did. They were unable to to do things the way they were because agency killed that. Apple and the price fix six killed off a lot of smaller eBook stores.

B&N bought them for their customer base, not because they were raking in money hand over fist. Once again, Amazon had 90% of the market at that point. Fictionwise couldn't compete with Amazon's deep pockets, that's why they sold themselves. Agency didn't come until a year later.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by leebase

No one has the numbers so the eInk folks can retain their delusion if they want. Ebook sales are increasing, eInk devices are not. Phones and tablets are.

Which says nothing about who is buying the eBooks or how many people read eBooks on tablets or smartphones. Your delusion seems to be that multi-use tablets and smartphones are bought primarily for eBook reading.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by leebase

If an iPad mini is to heavy for you...then so are books.

Which, of course, is beside the point when comparing the relative weight between e-Ink eReaders and tablets. An iPad weighs roughly twice as much as my Tolino Vision. Not an insignificant difference.

As for the rest of your post... I don't read comics at all, or PDFs on a mobile device, so this means nothing to me.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by haertig

I prefer reading novels on my eInk device, I prefer surfing the web and handling email on my tablet (actually on my desktop computer, but the tablet fills in when I'm mobile), I prefer listening to audiobooks on my mp3 player, and I prefer making phone calls on my smart phone (duh!)

Same here. If I had to regularly read eBooks on tablets or smartphones I wouldn't read eBooks. I know some people love to read eBooks on LCD screens. More power to them — but it's not for me.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by leebase

If an iPad mini is to heavy for you...then so are books.

An interesting claim to make even if totally incorrect. A pbook I am currently reading (Retief; Emissary to the Stars by Keith Laumer, Pocket 82918-1) weighs in at a massive 136 grams. Checking the last 6 pbooks I've read, only one outweighs an iPad Mini and that one is a hardcover of Treecat Wars.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by rcentros

I'm guessing that many of those who read on tablets and smartphones are "casual" readers. I'm also guessing the majority who read a lot (at least an hour daily) are probably doing so on an eInk eReader.

This is exactly why arguments about this sort of thing happen all the time. Not silly claims. Not ridiculous claims. Just unnecessarily judgmental claims. "Serious" and casual readers abound on both sides of the eink/tablet divide. So why is it that eink proponents seem to need eink to be seen as the hardcore readers' reader choice? It's like claiming many people who like paperbacks are casual readers (less than an hour a day) compared to those who prefer hardcovers.

I make no guesses about how "seriously" those who prefer eink approach their reading. Or how much they read, or for how long they read each day. So why can't that be reciprocated?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

B&N bought them for their customer base, not because they were raking in money hand over fist. Once again, Amazon had 90% of the market at that point. Fictionwise couldn't compete with Amazon's deep pockets, that's why they sold themselves. Agency didn't come until a year later.

You've gotten that all wrong. B&N bought Fictionwise for their eReader DRM. Fictionwise ran as normal from when B&N bought them until agency screwed them over. They were doing well before agency. Selling to B&N was not because they were doing poorly. It's beause B&N offered them enough money and allowed them to continue with business as normal. This was not about the customer base. It was for the DRM.

Again, you've gotten it all wrong.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You've gotten that all wrong. B&N bought Fictionwise for their eReader DRM. Fictionwise ran as normal from when B&N bought them until agency screwed them over. They were doing well before agency. Selling to B&N was not because they were doing poorly. It's beause B&N offered them enough money and allowed them to continue with business as normal. This was not about the customer base. It was for the DRM.

Again, you've gotten it all wrong.

They sold multi-format, DRM free since they didn't have an associated eReader like Sony and Amazon.

https://www.forbes.com/2009/03/05/ba...l#b4085e02adb9

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

They sold multi-format, DRM free since they didn't have an associated eReader like Sony and Amazon.

https://www.forbes.com/2009/03/05/ba...l#b4085e02adb9

They certainly didn't exclusively sell DRM-free ebooks. I bought them when available, sure. But the vast majority of ebooks I bought from Fictionwise had DRM. And they were called Secure eReader ebooks. PDB formatted for the eReader application.

[CWatkinsNash]

Response from Overdrive CEO, Steve Potash: "Macmillan publishes a work of fiction"

Let’s start with the faulty key premise. In the letter, Macmillan claims that when they test-windowed a selection of Tor ebooks for library lending, it resulted in an increase in retail ebook sales. This conclusion fails to provide any reference or data of scope and scale. With the exception of a few Tor best-selling authors, the vast majority of Tor ebooks and their authors have few to zero units of their ebooks available in US public library catalogs.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I make no guesses about how "seriously" those who prefer eink approach their reading. Or how much they read, or for how long they read each day. So why can't that be reciprocated?

Here's the way I look at it. If you buy an eInk eReader you're buying it for one use only — to read eBooks. If you buy a tablet or smartphone, chances are eBook reading will be well down the list of intended uses for this multi-purpose device. It's just the nature of the devices. I know quite a few people who own smartphones and/or tablets. Very few of them ever read on these devices. My sister-in-law is one exception, and she reads a book about once a month. I'm sure those who come to Mobile Read would be the exception here, since this is a forum for reading on mobile devices. But I don't think reading on tablets or smartphones it's the norm in the general population.

Mostly the reason I brought this up, however, is because leebase was talking about many millions more buying smartphones and tablets as if that somehow translated into many millions more reading on LCD screens rather than on eInk screens — totally disregarding the fact that the normal primary purpose of smartphones and tablets is not for reading.

[Dazrin]

I apologize for starting the nonsense "which is better for reading" argument again.

My point was that saying that the iPad is "the best way to read ebooks" is an inherently subjective statement that was presented as if it was a fact. "Tablets and phones" are almost certainly the most common way to read ebooks but "most common" is a not the same as the "best" and is also much different from the original statement that the "[iPad is] the best way to read ebooks."

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by rcentros

I know quite a few people who own smartphones and/or tablets. Very few of them ever read on these devices. My sister-in-law is one exception, and she reads a book about once a month.

And I know several people who bought dedicated eink ereaders who don't read more than a book a year (physical or electronic). But that doesn't cause me to assume that all who own eink devices barely read a book a year. For me to do so would be silly. You want to argue with leebase about numbers or averages.? Fine. Have at it. Seems kind of silly to me; but whatever. But assumptions about how much (and for how long) people read based solely upon the screen technology of the device they choose to read with is pointless and unnecessary. And usually demeaning.

[Raphi'Elohim]

For what it's worth I belong to the Ramapo-Catskill library system in New York State and I find their selection to be very limited no matter how many copies of ebooks for a specific title they allow for download etc... also, this is stealing so I don't advocate it but my Library system uses both overdrive and adobe digital editions and I just use the latter but the latter's DRM is easily stripped so that may be playing a factor here but I dunno I can't read the Wallstreet journal article so I am not a subscribing member.

Anyway, it seems like ebook piracy is on the rise :

https://goodereader.com/blog/e-book-...e-rise-in-2018

I stumbled upon one ebook piracy site and it claimed it has :

4,843,299 books
75,012,741 articles
for free


There is no way the current library system can compete with that. I think the piracy website is run by Russia and China but I am not sure.