LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 17 Jan 2016 17:21:25 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (83 lines)
From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 22:14:28 -0500

I see a number of qualifiers in Ann's original post. It's true that
professional societies don't publish "many" books, and it's true that
the output of books increases as you move toward the humanities. If
you add think tanks to the mix (e.g., Brookings, Wilson Center), the
number of books in HSS increases further. But "many"? No.

Assumption #3 is a bit slippery, though. It's true that books are not
outsourced the way journals are. But they are outsourced, if that is
the correct term, in other ways. For example, book publishers move
their products through distribution channels: YBP, Ingram, Baker &
Taylor, ProQuest, etc. The intermediaries serve as aggregators. So
while a society publisher is not a big deal, YBP/EBSCO is definitely a
big deal. And lurking behind everything, especially in the U.S., is
Amazon, which sells between 25% and 75% of all books, the range
depending on the kind of book (figure 40% for U. presses, for
example).

The basic truth is that books and journals are two entirely different
kinds of products. They each have their own ecosystem.

BTW, this is a good opportunity to point out the special role that U.
presses play in the book world: 14,600 books a year, of which 5,000
are original academic monographs. They are documenting our
civilization, but get little credit for this.

Joe Esposito

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:55 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: "Brian C. Gray" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 21:50:01 -0500
>
> Just of the top of my head and with no research, I can think of
> several societies that publish books, such as the RSC, ACS, IEEE, IOP,
> ECS, ASM, etc. I do not believe these assumptions are accurate.
>
> Brian
>
>
> Brian C. Gray
> Team Leader, Research Services
> Librarian: Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering and Macromolecular
> Science & Engineering
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Kelvin Smith Library 201-K
> Research Guides & Profile: http://researchguides.case.edu/briangray
>
> Case Western Reserve University
> Kelvin Smith Library
> 11055 Euclid Avenue
> Cleveland, Ohio 44106-7151
>
> 2015-16 ALAO President: http://alaoweb.org/
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:55 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 13:40:46 -0500
> >
> > Hello, liblicense-l colleagues.  Here some assumptions arising several
> > times at ALA-Boston last week.  I realized I don't have enough depth
> > to validate them (or not).
> >
> > 1.       Assumption:  STM societies don’t publish many (if any?)
> > books, mostly journals.
> >
> > 2.       Assumption:  HSS societies do publish books/monographs, as
> > well as journals.
> >
> > 3.       Assumption:  Societies (both STM and HSS) don’t outsource
> > book publishing to commercial publishers the way they do journals
> > because there isn’t a big enough margin in it for publishers to want
> > to do it.
> >
> > Any insights would be greatly appreciated!
> >
> > Best regards, Ann Okerson

ATOM RSS1 RSS2