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