From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 19:12:46 -0700

Tony,

I wrote about this a while ago:

http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2015/03/12/what-we-got-wrong-about-books/

My view is that DDA necessarily leads to higher prices, and that's a good
thing. The idea that a book whose costs can be amortized across, say,
300-500 copies will only cost $35 is crazy.  Short-term rentals should be
higher priced proportionately, and the cost must be incurred from the first
page, not after reading a chapter.

Joe Esposito


On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 6:50 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> 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]
>