Now if the DOJ would just pay attention, they would see how wrong they are. I’m an apple fan, I admit it, but even if I wasn’t, common sense kicks in from the retail and sales background I have. To put all the power in one companies hands, which is what the DOJ is trying to do, give amazon a chokehold on everyone, you will defeat everything that has been achieved for eBooks. As I have said before, hard to have collusion when everyone knows what you’re doing, so even going after apple for that, is ridiculous. Hell, publishers have discounts and better deals for certain vendors in certain markets, I don’t see any one being pissed about that. People buy where they want to buy, if it’s spendy, they shop for a deal or they don’t buy.
DOJ just needs to grow up and realize they have screwed up, put their tail between their legs and move on, you’ve done enough damage.
JISC e-books observatory final report, some great information here..
So much of the conversation for the past week or two has been about HarperCollins implementing a limitation of 26 checkouts before an eBook is considered used up and you need to purchase a new one. Now many people have chimed in with some great thoughts, views and ideas and that’s awesome, that’s exactly what is needed. Check out Guy Gonzalez or any of the others or heck, just jump on twitter and follow the #hcod hashtag to follow along. Now I’m someone who has worked in the library world for many years, well over a decade now and that’s not counting all the other publishing gigs I have held. So I know libraries, I understand them, I’ve worked with them in sales roles, consulting roles and as advocates for them, understanding workflows, especially when it comes to digital offerings. I believe strongly in libraries and librarians and I also understand the business side of things. Now before you get crazy on me, here what I have to say. Publishers, trade publishers are scared of eBooks. They feel they cannibalize sales, take away from print sales and drive down profits. All understandable items, no profits means no new material means no publisher means the library has no new content or support for content they have acquired or subscribe to. This all makes sense from a business standpoint and I know authors that are just as worried as well. What this comes from is a lack of knowledge and understanding of both sides. Libraries want it to work a certain way and they want it to be the same as others or at least as manageable as other content, I get it, I agree, the reality is that it won’t be so, especially for the trade market. Now if we are talking academic or reference/research content as eBooks, well, that’s a different story and that is figured out, but that content is unique and we cannot, cannot put a square peg into a round hole, just won’t work for trade content. Continue reading
Some great information over at the Book Business Mag website. Book Publishing, Book Industry News, Content Delivery, Production Tips : Book Business. I get the printed mag as well as follow online. The issue is good, however, I found one piece really interesting. It talks about eBooks and how publishers are approaching the emerging e and how that is affecting print.
There are some great questions asked; how much percentage wise accounts for your print vs eBook sales, etc. What I thought was interesting is that one had a fear of the PDA approach. For those not knowing what this is; here’s a down and dirty. Patron Drive Acquisition puts the collection development and acquisition part of purchases into the patrons hands. I think what scares pubs is will the big ticket items for them sell. Well, if you truly about giving your customers the content they want, how they want it, then this shouldn’t scare you. (this is exactly what many pubs say they are trying to accomplish) Continue reading
Trying out mobile posting from the WordPress iPhone app. Nice functions and easy to use, this’ll make updating easy and fast.