From: Kathleen Keane <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 21:58:35 +0000

At the Johns Hopkins University Press we have analyzed aggregation
opportunities in terms of their suitability for different types of
books and markets.  We have successfully licensed e-books through
Project MUSE and also other aggregation services.  We have experienced
increased usage, exposure, and revenues at major universities by
participating in aggregations. Our books are also now being read by
students in small schools, community colleges, high schools, and in
countries where we have no footprint at all. The revenues have not
replaced print sales of decades past but we may not have gotten any
sales at all if we hadn't made our content accessible. We also now
have valuable usage metrics to mine.  Over 80% of the 25,000+ plus
titles on Project MUSE have recorded at least one chapter download and
usage is growing exponentially -- approaching 2 million chapters
downloaded since 2012. I believe e-books in aggregations can be
fiscally responsible and bring publishers closer to the reader than
ever before.

Kathleen Keane

Kathleen Keane
Director, Johns Hopkins University Press
Baltimore, MD  21201
[log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----

From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2014 13:54:41 -0400

For U. presses, libraries make up a minority of purchases.  Current
estimates put that at about 20-25% of total volume.  Your mileage may
vary, of course.  The prudent path for  U. press is (a) to keep books
out of library aggregations and (b) to build their direct-to-consumer
business.

Joe Esposito


On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 12:05 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Fred Jenkins <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 11:19:11 -0400
>
> I don't think most of us are confusing specialized with poor quality.
> I work in classics, so I see a lot of very good work with a very
> limited audience. In general, there is a fair amount of mediocre and
> some outright bad scholarship floating around (just look at all the
> retractions in peer-reviewed science/social sicence journals in recent
> years).  But for monographs, the problem really is that they have
> become too expensive and too specialized for the current distribution
> system.  It doesn't make economic sense for 100-200 libraries all to
> buy monographs that might only be used in 5-10 of them.  The U presses
> have largely been supported on the library side by approval plans and
> standing orders that bought first and asked questions later.
> Shrinking budgets require asking the questions first.
>
> Fred W. Jenkins, Ph.D.
> Professor and Associate Dean for Collections and Operations University
> of Dayton Libraries Dayton, OH 45469-1360