It happened: Library lend generates a sale

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by BadBilly

It's interesting to note that statistics show revenue from book publishing increasing in all regions. Unlike music executives, who had grown used to one record-breaking year after another through the 80s and 90s, saw a decrease as evidence of lost sales due to file-sharing, publishing execs seem to think they're entitled to more even though their revenues are increasing.

I suspect a survey of serious readers (say, anyone who reads 10 books a year or more) would find that the overwhelming majority had, at some point purchased a book based on a library experience connected to that book. That could be another book in the series, another book by the same author or a similar subject. Books represent an investment in time and money and buying blind doesn't appeal to a lot of people.

Yes, imagine the audacity of a for profit company thinking they should increase revenue. What next, snake oil salesmen not being entirely truthful about their products?

You're likely correct, those who read more would stand a chance of both borrowing from the library and buying books. It further stands to reason that some of those same people would have made purchases based on borrows, but the reverse is also true, someone buys a book from a new to them author enjoys it and then borrows their backlist from the library. There's less friction for them since backlist is in general not as in demand, with the exception of authors like JK Rowling who stay in the zeitgeist on a perpetual status.

Though circling back to those statistics, as far as I could see they never touched on ebooks versus physical, I'll grant they may and I missed it as I had no interest in signing up for a premium account which seemed to be the only means to get all the data. Given that nothing has changed with physical books and libraries in quite some time, save perhaps adjustments in price which follow along with inflation, while there have been changes in ebooks and libraries, it's clear publishers want to boost those sales.

Given the proliferation of multi-purpose devices, smartphones, tablets, netbooks, etc. which many seem to also use to read on, it would seem that the better thing for preservation of the planet would be to move toward ebooks. Though I don't want this to derail into a fight over the carbon footprint of those devices versus the millions of books printed every year so I'll not say anything more on that.

It's also probable that the publishers aren't going after voracious readers, who for the US would seem to make up a rather small percentage of the population, but those who are somewhere in the middle who are likely entirely unaware of this forum, don't pay any mind to what publishers do or what libraries do. They just borrow the current popular book, if available, or if it's unavailable they buy it.

Of course if one actually examines books as a resource they should be priced far higher. After all each one is rather unique, you will not get a Harry Potter story outside of Rowling, at least not for our lifetimes, though you may get imitations. You get hours upon hours of enjoyment from them, often reducing the price/time ratio to mere cents per hour. Rather unlike movies.

[Tomk2]

Yes, but how many buy the exact ebook they still have on loan. Not a sequel, not a prequel, not just because it is the same author, but buy the exact ebook the library is still letting them read. And how many of you knew that Amazon automatically returns your library lend when you buy the same book you still have on loan?


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by Tomk2

Yes, but how many buy the exact ebook they still have on loan. Not a sequel, not a prequel, not just because it is the same author, but buy the exact ebook the library is still letting them read. And how many of you knew that Amazon automatically returns your library lend when you buy the same book you still have on loan?


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Probably a smaller amount than those who just use the library to borrow books, which is why for the publishers they're a statistical write off, they wouldn't even nudge the margin of error.

It always amazes me when people on this forum want to act as if they have more data in their anecdotal tales. It makes me wonder if they challenge doctors who tell them if they're sick or not.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

It always amazes me when people on this forum want to act as if they have more data in their anecdotal tales. It makes me wonder if they challenge doctors who tell them if they're sick or not.

I just made a comment that I bought books because I discovered an author via the library. I didn't think this was controversial in any way. I guess I was wrong. EVERYTHING seems to be controversial on this subject.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by rcentros

I just made a comment that I bought books because I discovered an author via the library. I didn't think this was controversial in any way. I guess I was wrong. EVERYTHING seems to be controversial on this subject.

To be fair, I didn't say everyone here always did this.

I specified a perimeter, people here who make claims of how a multimillion dollar company should run their business, commenting as if they knew the data points better than that company despite not having anywhere near the amount of data.

None of your posts in this thread would fill the criteria.

I do hope you enjoyed my answer to what kind of bird was flapping its wings.

[Tony Richards]

Originally Posted by BadBilly

Books represent an investment in time and money and buying blind doesn't appeal to a lot of people.

This really hits the nail on the head, doesn't it? Particularly with eBooks, where a title or a cover doesn't necessarily grab you the same way that it would in a hard-print bookstore. Which is precisely why Kindle's policy of allowing limited time free offers on eBooks is a very good idea. It's kind of like a very short term library, allowing readers to browse before making a decision.

[Tomk2]

Originally Posted by rcentros

I just made a comment that I bought books because I discovered an author via the library. I didn't think this was controversial in any way. I guess I was wrong. EVERYTHING seems to be controversial on this subject.

It's a love triangle of sorts. Publishers, libraries, and you (the reader). Like all love triangles, there is a lot of insecurity and tension.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[leebase]

This just in - every author that I came to love I discovered in the library...until college when I stopped reading fiction for awhile.

This also just in - I have never once bought a book after having read the book from the library.

Further...this just in....my wife doesn't want to buy books and goes to the library to find them instead.

Carry on.

[ekbell]

I've frequently bought a book I first read in the library. It could be a factor of spending my 20's moving all the time or the discovery that libraries can and do remove books from their catalog. It's definitely due to the fact that I like rereading.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by leebase

This just in - every author that I came to love I discovered in the library...until college when I stopped reading fiction for awhile.

This also just in - I have never once bought a book after having read the book from the library.

Further...this just in....my wife doesn't want to buy books and goes to the library to find them instead.

Carry on.

There are *many* books that I've bought after first reading them in a library. I've also bought books that were first loaned to me by friends and relatives.

This is in addition to all of the authors that I first discovered because of libraries - most of my favorite authors fall into this category.

Shari

[leebase]

Originally Posted by shalym

There are *many* books that I've bought after first reading them in a library. I've also bought books that were first loaned to me by friends and relatives.

This is in addition to all of the authors that I first discovered because of libraries - most of my favorite authors fall into this category.

Shari

I don't believe anyone has asserted "library checkouts never lead to sales".

What Macmillan wants is to prevent library checkouts from competing with sales for the first 8 weeks of a book being published.

If checking out a book had a high correlation to a person buying that very book....no publisher would be looking to alter their relationship with libraries.

Libraries and the publishers will keep negotiating their relationship.

It was inevitable that as checking out an ebook from the library became as easy as buying a book...publishers were going to react.

It's the same battle that the publishers had over Amazon setting the price of the entire NYT's best seller list at $9.99. After all hoopla, there came a choice. Accept time windowing of ebooks, or give up control of setting the price.

Apparently, those first few months of a book's being available for sale are a lucrative time window for the publishers.

Libraries are not going to win this battle. Nor should they. It is quite reasonable to withhold book borrowing for the first 2 months of a book's release.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by leebase

What Macmillan wants is to prevent library checkouts from competing with sales for the first 8 weeks of a book being published.

If checking out a book had a high correlation to a person buying that very book....no publisher would be looking to alter their relationship with libraries.

Libraries and the publishers will keep negotiating their relationship.

It was inevitable that as checking out an ebook from the library became as easy as buying a book...publishers were going to react.

Libraries are not going to win this battle. Nor should they. It is quite reasonable to withhold book borrowing for the first 2 months of a book's release.

I agree, and it's not even like the publishers are withholding entirely. The ebook is only limited to one licenses (which is cheaper AND perpetual) in those 8 weeks.

And despite a rather lengthy thread of protests over this change I've yet to read a reasonable response as to why this is "unfair" to anyone.