Online petition over library ebook embargo

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

One publisher isn't following suit and that is BAEN.
A direct competitor to Tor, which is the whole cause of the catfight, apparently.

https://scrivenerserror.blogspot.com/2019/11/jB08x.html

Yes, this article isn't heavily biased at all. The author barely goes a sentence without insulting Tor, Macmillan, or anyone not sharing his viewpoint.

So, Tor's business is hurting enough that a (mythical?) eight percent of their sales is worth going to war with (by their own admission) one of their biggest customers? Really?

Where has Macmillan said libraries were their biggest customers? Figures posted here would seem to indicate otherwise, that libraries make up a rather small percentage of their sales. Even Overdrive backs this up noting a rather limited selection of Tor books were bought by libraries.

And they do this just as BAEN finalized a years-long struggle to get their books into libraries? So libraries boycotting MacMillan can divert the money to BAEN?

I have never heard of anyone going to a bookstore or library and asking "Where are the *insert publisher* books?".

If TOR's sales have dropped that much (which I don't doubt on price alone) that they need an 8% boost of their sales enough to start this fight they must be pretty close to the edge.

For that matter, SF&F is supposed to be a niche: does TOR matter that much to MacMillan's bottom line?

This just in companies like making money, if 8% can be gained without any major offset, then they're going to want to gain that 8%.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Are you talking about the small group of people that use the library to get their books for free just to save some money? It is John Sargent who believes they have such incredible buying power to increase revenue. Nobody believes the letter he wrote unless you were already in Macmillan's corner.

Fairly obviously, he doesn't based on his actions. This is much like the fight over setting prices on Amazon, it's about not letting something that might become harmful to the publishers become entrenched in the public's conscience.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by meeera

Also known as "professional librarians", and that's a pretty sexist metaphor.

I don't think this link by Overdrive's founder has been posted yet, has it?


Macmillan publishes a work of fiction



Overdrive: posting facts and figures. MacMillan: claiming that they have some, but not sharing them, and misrepresenting the ones they do.

It's a common saying in the States. Of course, some people go out of their way to be offended by many things.

Not much in the way of facts in that particular harangue. Obviously, Overdrive has a business model to protect. They are worried that MacMillian might damage that business model. That's the way things go. MacMillian could have simply cut off ebooks to libraries for the first 3 month. They didn't. It appears to me that after doing an experiment, they are trying to find the middle road. It sounds reasonable to me.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

It's a common saying in the States. Of course, some people go out of their way to be offended by many things.

Not much in the way of facts in that particular harangue. Obviously, Overdrive has a business model to protect. They are worried that MacMillian might damage that business model. That's the way things go. MacMillian could have simply cut off ebooks to libraries for the first 3 month. They didn't. It appears to me that after doing an experiment, they are trying to find the middle road. It sounds reasonable to me.

First 8 weeks, or two (2) months, lets not get the telephone game going again.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Yes, this article isn't heavily biased at all. The author barely goes a sentence without insulting Tor, Macmillan, or anyone not sharing his viewpoint.



Where has Macmillan said libraries were their biggest customers? Figures posted here would seem to indicate otherwise, that libraries make up a rather small percentage of their sales. Even Overdrive backs this up noting a rather limited selection of Tor books were bought by libraries.



I have never heard of anyone going to a bookstore or library and asking "Where are the *insert publisher* books?".



This just in companies like making money, if 8% can be gained without any major offset, then they're going to want to gain that 8%.

Well, people have opinions and on the internet, you can find an opinion to support just about any point of view. I didn't find the blog post particularly persuasive.

For the most part, this seems to be something that is being driven by a small group of people with the any stick to beat the publishers with crowd piling on. I suspect this will go the way of the agency pricing, i.e. a small group will continue to pound the table over it, but everyone else just moves on. Those who want to get ebooks from their libraries will continue to be able to do so. They may not get the latest best seller on the day it hits the streets without actually buying it, but that's a personal choice to make.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

First 8 weeks, or two (2) months, lets not get the telephone game going again.

Hey, we aren't talking about what they did, we are talking about what they could have done. I deliberately used 3 months for a reason.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Well, people have opinions and on the internet, you can find an opinion to support just about any point of view. I didn't find the blog post particularly persuasive.

For the most part, this seems to be something that is being driven by a small group of people with the any stick to beat the publishers with crowd piling on. I suspect this will go the way of the agency pricing, i.e. a small group will continue to pound the table over it, but everyone else just moves on. Those who want to get ebooks from their libraries will continue to be able to do so. They may not get the latest best seller on the day it hits the streets without actually buying it, but that's a personal choice to make.

I suspect you're quite right, I just enjoy pounding back at said people, especially when they prove unable to present an argument without merit.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

I suspect you're quite right, I just enjoy pounding back at said people, especially when they prove unable to present an argument without merit.

Seriously? You believe everything the noble publishers dish up? No wonder you are so happy to say that anybody opposing the gospel according to Macmillan has no merit.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Seriously? You believe everything the noble publishers dish up? No wonder you are so happy to say that anybody opposing the gospel according to Macmillan has no merit.

Says the one lapping up what the libraries are saying or overdrive.

Of the parties involved, the libraries, overdrive, and the publishers only one can exist without the others. Which is going to make me question them slightly less than the two who would dwindle without the third.

I also don’t believe everything that the publishers say. However they are a for profit business. As such their motives are rather basic they want to maximize profits.

The libraries are a non profit. They’re going to seek to get whatever they want for the least they possibly can, doing the least they have to. And before you get bent out of shape I said libraries not librarians. So when they say the publishers deal is totally unfair but the details of that deal don’t support their claim and they resort to depriving the public of a part of their service I’m not going to pay their continued cries much heed.

Finally overdrive which has a everything to lose if publishers stop providing ebooks to libraries I’m going to scrutinize everything they say and what they don’t say.

As to agency pricing if you really want to beat that dead horse, publishers will set a price at a point where they get the most sales at the highest price. If you don’t like the price don’t buy the product. If enough people agree with you the price will be adjusted down. However it seems more people feel the prices are reasonable. No amount of people crying about “unfair” pricing is going to change that while people are still buying the product.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Says the one lapping up what the libraries are saying or overdrive.

I have no stake in it. The only reason I won't sign the petition is, because it doesn't effect me. When I am going to the library I expect that I have to wait. I believe it is better not to vote for or against something when I am making a decision for others. Discussing it? Sure I am up to that. A lot can be learned.

Of the parties involved, the libraries, overdrive, and the publishers only one can exist without the others. Which is going to make me question them slightly less than the two who would dwindle without the third.

Only overdrive cannot exist without publisher or library. Libraries don't depend on overdrive and will still exist with a limited list of publishers. They are existing right now with a limited list of publishers.

I also don’t believe everything that the publishers say. However they are a for profit business. As such their motives are rather basic they want to maximize profits.

They cannot afford to maximize profits at all costs. Publishers are not always doing things in the best interest of profit. Penguin Random, for example, is a lot nicer to libraries than Macmillan, even before this current mess. For profit? Nah, don't think so. They simply are more interested in a good relationship with the libraries. Libraries are important, even if they are less capitalistic and more socialistic in nature.

The libraries are a non profit. They’re going to seek to get whatever they want for the least they possibly can, doing the least they have to. And before you get bent out of shape I said libraries not librarians. So when they say the publishers deal is totally unfair but the details of that deal don’t support their claim and they resort to depriving the public of a part of their service I’m not going to pay their continued cries much heed.

You are the only one calling it "depriving the public of a part of their service". Actually, if they wouldn't boycott they are depriving the public of equal access during the embargo time. I am not sure how exactly they will go about it - it could be interpreted that after 8 weeks a book out of embargo can be bought, or that any book subject to the embargo at the beginning is a no buy forever. I suspect it is the former, because the librarians argument for the boycott is the inability to meet demand of their patrons. And no, your argument that one copy is better than no copy, is incorrect. It is contrary to the equal access for everybody in a timely fashion. There is also a chance that Macmillan changes tack sometime and stops further embargos. It would be silly to continue the boycott after a policy change, as it is impossible to undo the embargo in the past after it has been lifted. (Unless a time machine ... No, I don't believe in the possiblity of a time machine, otherwise we would already have one )

Finally overdrive which has a everything to lose if publishers stop providing ebooks to libraries I’m going to scrutinize everything they say and what they don’t say.

Stop providing ebooks forever or temporarily after release? Sure they depend on publishers to provide ebooks, but that really is not getting them any money until a library purchases a license. Shouldn't OD complain about libraries for planning their boycott thingy?

As to agency pricing if you really want to beat that dead horse, publishers will set a price at a point where they get the most sales at the highest price. If you don’t like the price don’t buy the product. If enough people agree with you the price will be adjusted down. However it seems more people feel the prices are reasonable. No amount of people crying about “unfair” pricing is going to change that while people are still buying the product.

Apparently they are not buying enough, or you wouldn't have people that buy ebooks go to the library to consume Big5 ebooks without buying for themselves.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

...
Apparently they are not buying enough, or you wouldn't have people that buy ebooks go to the library to consume Big5 ebooks without buying for themselves.

Seriously? You question why people would want to get something for free rather than pay for it? There is always a group of people who are focused on getting stuff as cheaply as possible. This is the core business model of places like Sam's Club and Costco. Where such businesses start to fail is when the quality of goods drops to a point where people no longer feel the goods are no longer a good buy.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Seriously? You question why people would want to get something for free rather than pay for it? There is always a group of people who are focused on getting stuff as cheaply as possible. This is the core business model of places like Sam's Club and Costco. Where such businesses start to fail is when the quality of goods drops to a point where people no longer feel the goods are no longer a good buy.

Obviously price matters. It is not even a question of why an Indie is able to price lower than a publishing house. When buying a book, the store matters, the service matters, the buying experience matters. Take the price out of the equation, there is no longer any need to shop around. There is now only the question: is this book worth the asking price to get it now and here, or go to the library and wait. More than likely you get your book checked out before the publisher decides to run any kind of sale.

Agency pricing does hurt when it is only applied to ebooks and not pbooks as well. If it were possible to enforce agency on pbook, do you honestly believe it would be in the best interest of publishers? If not, why is it okay to treat ebooks different.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Obviously price matters. It is not even a question of why an Indie is able to price lower than a publishing house. When buying a book, the store matters, the service matters, the buying experience matters. Take the price out of the equation, there is no longer any need to shop around. There is now only the question: is this book worth the asking price to get it now and here, or go to the library and wait. More than likely you get your book checked out before the publisher decides to run any kind of sale.

Agency pricing does hurt when it is only applied to ebooks and not pbooks as well. If it were possible to enforce agency on pbook, do you honestly believe it would be in the best interest of publishers? If not, why is it okay to treat ebooks different.

You note that ebook prices for the big five tend to be a bit below the current price of the paper version (either hard back or paper).
As far as agency goes, agency was designed to solve a specific problem, i.e. Amazon using their profits from other businesses to price specific best seller books below cost at a time where the price of ebooks hadn't been set in the customers' mind. It was something that could only be sustained for a short time, but that specific time was when customers' expectations were being set.

After about 14 years, I think that price point (i.e. a bit below the paper price) has been set in the customer's mind. The publishers have set the floor of what the price of a book is by what they charge the stores. You likely are not going to see anyone try to sell ebooks at a loss again.

Agency pricing for paper books wouldn't really make much sense. The paper price is already set in the customers' mind. Yes, you have discount book stores. They serve a purpose, i.e. once a print run is done, that cost is sunk. The publishers can do one of two things with the remainders, they can either destroy them or sell them to discount whole sellers to try to salvage at least something for them.

Frankly, I think the only reason that we still have agency pricing is because the publishers don't trust Amazon.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Frankly, I think the only reason that we still have agency pricing is because the publishers don't trust Amazon.

And they are probably right. They are playing right into the hands of Amazon. I don't believe for a second that they mind the market power of Amazon. Ultimately it matters little who sells the books for them as long as they get sold.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

And they are probably right. They are playing right into the hands of Amazon. I don't believe for a second that they mind the market power of Amazon. Ultimately it matters little who sells the books for them as long as they get sold.

Consider what we saw in the music business when Apple had the same monopoly in the music download business (iTunes store) that Amazon currently has in the eBook store. It made the music companies very, very nervous, so they game Amazon no DRM as leverage over Apple to generate competition.