From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 07:29:17 -0700

Anthony,

I posted a comment to the Poe piece at IHS.  Poe's argument stands on
shaky data.  To begin with, he assumes that the primary market for U.
press books is the library. But libraries make up only about 25% of U.
press revenues today, a figure that may be dropping.  Poe also notes
subsidies to presses.  The total subsidies amount to around $30
million, about the budget of one large library, and that's for the
entire U.S. U. press industry, which collectively has about $320
million in revenue.  Presses, in other words, are creatures of the
marketplace.  I should add that many presses generate a surplus, which
taken together, would wipe out the subsidy (some institutions are more
fortunate than others, but in the aggregate, the U. press community
more than covers its costs).

There is a lot wrong with U. press publishing today, but Poe is
barking up the wrong tree.

Joe Esposito

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 9:08 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 15:39:44 +0100
>
> I am enclosing below a link to an article which I do not necessary
> agree with in its entirety but which I think Jill, Nawin and Sandy
> plus others on this list might like to see as it is highly relevant or
> so it seems to me:
>
> http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2012/07/09/essay-what-university-presses-should-do?goback=%2Egde_65026_member_132029668
>
> Anthony Watkinson