From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 21:23:20 -0500
These are fascinating replies -- thank you for them and any to come.
But, lest there be a misunderstanding: while I (and many others no
doubt) can explain after the fact why XX acquired (or merged with) YY,
what I mean to say is that the initial announcement more often than
not comes as a surprise. However, usually after giving it a little
(and often not very much) thought, we can understand the underlying
strategy. After the fact. So maybe my real question here is, why
don't librarians see most of these acquisitions coming, for I doubt we
do. I mean, which of us pondered and figured out back at the time,
that Elsevier's next acquisition would be Mendeley? (sorry for
picking on Elsevier, but I trust they don't mind). Anyone? Really?
(Perhaps investment analysts and consultants do, though.)
And who do we librarians think could be eyeing whom, next? Ilkay Holt
was brave enough to venture a shot at this question in her posting
yesterday, but she may be the only one.
Or maybe these questions just wrong. Perhaps Joe Esposito will write
up this discussion in Scholarly Kitchen and we will be enlightened!!
Best regards, Ann Okerson
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 7:59 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Ian Gibson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 15:32:46 +0000
>
> Agree with all of you vis. Elsevier/Mendeley and ProQuest Ex Libris
> (in fact given that PQ have been promising an Alma competitor for
> years and had yet to deliver this move made very good sense to me).
>
> The move that didn't make sense to me was ProQuest buying Coutts. I
> understand the need to be in every space that Ebsco is in but to me
> (as a former Coutts customer) the move didn’t make sense from a
> momentum stand point. YBP is the clear market leader in that business
> and everyone else are also-rans at best. Coutts' Oasis platform is old
> and awkward to use, they were consistently behind in providing
> services (e.g. offering ebooks other than MyiLibrary; managing DDA;
> managing DDA across multiple vendors) and their customer base seemed
> to me to be shrinking. The only possible way this makes sense to me is
> if PQ uses Coutts as a way of getting better data on library ebook
> preferences by monitoring what their customers are buying instead of
> PQ ebooks and then uses that info to make PQ ebooks the dominant
> player in that market.
>
> What I really want is for Elsevier to buy PLOS - yes, yes it's nigh on
> impossible but just think of the comedy value... Failing that I would
> settle for one of the big societies like IEEE or ACS handing over
> their publishing ops to one of the big commercial publishers.
>
> Ian
>
> Ian Gibson, MISt
> Collections Librarian
> Brock University | James A. Gibson Library
> Niagara Region
> St. Catharines, Ontario L2S 3A1
> E [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Matheson, Scott" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 14:17:31 +0000
>
> I had the same thoughts - immediately - as Brian about Proquest/Ex
> Libris. I also said that I'd like to double-down on Ebsco buying
> Innovative (both ILS vendors were/are owned by private equity, have
> large installed bases in customer libraries and face sharp competition
> from OCLC and vendor-supported open-source solutions as well as a
> perception of declining value in the age of "discovery layers" and
> university efforts to consolidate business systems; e-resource
> integration with library catalog is a perpetual pain-point for
> collection managers; leading "discovery layers" are provided by
> Proquest and Ebsco).
>
> I will say I was initially surprised by the Mendeley acquisition. In
> addition to Brian's notes on data acquisition, I'd add this in
> retrospect:
>
> Publishers have been unable to (unmotivated to?) provide all content
> on a single platform for users (who don't care who publishes something
> they want). We know from EndNote, Zotero, etc. that researchers in
> many disciplines need or want to have everything in one place
> regardless of journal or publisher source (see also photocopies a few
> decades ago - this is not new behavior). Mendeley was initially
> marketed - or at least explained, elevator pitch-wise, as "iTunes for
> journal articles" in a time when other citation mangers didn't store
> full text or allow simple collaboration.
>
> So... if Elsevier can't get researchers to use *only* ScienceDirect,
> then maybe they can get them to use a more publisher-agnostic platform
> that they control. And if the iTunes for articles thing happens - even
> in a few disciplines - the acquisition is a smart hedge. What would
> EMI and Sony have paid for iTunes 10 years ago knowing what they know
> now?
>
> On publisher + service: in US law we're seeing publishers give up on
> claiming advantage with primary source coverage (copyright-free,
> value-added indexing no longer viewed as much of a value) and move on
> to "practice management solutions" that combine workflow software with
> publisher editorial content and local document/knowledge management.
> A) sound like E+Mendeley? and B) view of things to come if/as OA content grows?
>
> Scott
> ____________
> Scott Matheson, Associate Librarian for Technical Services Lillian
> Goldman Law Library, Yale Law School
> 203-432-1603 | Box 208326, New Haven, CT 06520-8326
>
>
> > On Dec 3, 2015, at 9:26 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: "Brian C. Gray" <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 20:56:59 -0500
> >
> > I have not seen any of the acquisitions as a surprise. Even the 2 Ann
> > mentions seem to make strong business sense. With Mendeley, Elsevier
> > gets even more data on information users overall which includes data
> > of competitor titles and how they are used. It also provides another
> > tool libraries can justify purchases. PQ is developing a new
> > integrated library system, so with Ex Libris they gain an immediate
> > customer base, intellectual property in this area, and a team of
> > software developers and other experts in this realm.
> >
> > 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
|
