From: Tony Sanfilippo <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 06:55:48 -0500

Joe, I don't think I can agree that it's a win-win. It doesn't seem to
me that DDA/PDA is or will only be used to displace ILL. It currently
seems to be displacing collection development at more and more
libraries. From my perspective it means fewer copies being sold for
each title which is likely to mean higher and higher prices. A $35
transaction expense will be a steal in comparison. And more and more
consortial lending will help to bring that transaction cost down.
Perhaps an equilibrium will be achieved from the libraries'
perspective, but I don't think publishers will perceive it as a win.
It will continue to mean fewer print and ebooks sold and more and more
lending between library systems.

Now if you mean that DDA/PDA is replacing ILL in instances that don't
trigger a purchase—the quick check to be sure a book says what you
think it says, or you just need a quick cite and the discovery system
brought you right where you needed to go—then yes, there will be that
net savings for libraries. But that will drive more and more
publishers away from the model, possibly leading to its collapse.

I suspect the other unintended consequence of DDA/PDA beyond higher
title costs will be fewer publishing opportunities for scholars. When
the risk to the publisher increases, they are much more selective, and
will intentionally focus on the popular, and won't be able to gamble
on something that is merely good or novel. It's happening now. Have
you looked at the most recent season of university press catalogs? I
haven't seen that many trade books coming from university presses
since the nineties—cookbooks, mystery novels, poetry, memoirs, graphic
novels. Seems to me to be a response to the landscape this model is
creating. We're not publishing for libraries anymore, we're starting
to publish for Amazon.

Best,
Tony Sanfilippo


Tony Sanfilippo, Director
Ohio State University Press
180 Pressey Hall
1070 Carmack Road
Columbus, OH 43210-1002
ohiostatepress.org
(614) 292-7818

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 4:37 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 09:14:18 -0500
>
> I know that ILL is not free for librarians. The last time I looked
> into this I came across estimates of $35 per loan. If there is more
> recent information on this, I would like to know. This is ILL for
> print books, of course; ILL for ebooks would be a very different
> matter, one which may be constrained by copyright law. I have no
> expertise on that matter.
>
> My point about ILL and DDA/PDA is that DDA for electronic books is
> likely to displace ILL for print (for those books that appear in DDA
> aggregrations). A short-term loan may cost less than the $35 for print
> ILL. Publishers are likely to support this because they receive no
> income from ILL, but receive revenue from DDA (which is shared with
> the aggregator and author). It's a win-win, is it not? Libraries have
> lower costs, publishers receive income. The trucking companies lose
> out.
>
> Joe Esposito
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 11:11 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: "Gonzales, Rhonda L" <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:28:40 -0700
> >
> > Joe,
> >
> > I always appreciate your comments. But I did want to interject that
> > ILL is not free for libraries. There is a fairly high cost per volume
> > to conduct ILL transactions, both borrowing and lending. Libraries
> > absorb the cost of lending so that we can reap the benefits of
> > borrowing - that's what makes the system work. We choose to purchase
> > many print books that we could obtain for patrons via ILL both as a
> > convenience for our constituents as well as a cost savings for
> > ourselves. I assume that we would do this for ebooks as well, even if
> > we could get them via ILL from another library.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Rhonda Gonzales
> > Dean of Library Services, Colorado State University-Pueblo
> > [log in to unmask]