HarperCollins Executive Calls Circulation Cap a "Work in Progress"
By Michael Kelley Apr 5, 2011HarperCollins knew that its decision to cap ebook circulations at 26 would generate some heat, but the intensity, nonetheless, surprised the company.
"We certainly expected a variety of responses, and we knew that there would be a lot of people that had issues," Josh Marwell, president of sales, told LJ after speaking to some 150 librarians gathered Tuesday at the Darien Library, CT, as part of "eBooks: Collections at the Crossroads," a symposium organized by the Connecticut Library Consortium (#clctrendspotting, #clcebooks). "I think what was surprising was the intensity and how widespread it was. There were a lot of people who are not carrying ebooks now who entered into the fray," he said.
26 not set in stone
Marwell said the ebook business presents a monumental change that is difficult to gauge, and the company felt it needed to put its stake in the ground.
"Is 26 set in stone? No. It's our number for now, but we want to hear back. Immediately. Honestly, it doesn't make sense that one size fits all. We consider it a work in progress. But this is the number that we have now," he said.
"I invite you to test the water. Use it. Give us feedback. We're in the water. We want to be here," he said, noting that the company wants to sell ebooks to libraries and has been doing so for ten years. Marwell pointed out that HarperCollins has been hearing "quietly" from some librarians who are going to see how the new policy works for them.
"We try to be intelligent about our policy," he said. "And when we landed on 26, the information that we had was that most books don't circulate 26 times. In terms of the long tail, this particular number probably works for a different part of the collection. We realize it doesn't work for the best sellers."
But selling in perpetuity to libraries remains a serious concern "about the overall ecosystem," he said. "That is at the heart of the issue."
Other models needed
Eli Neiburger, associate director for IT & production at Ann Arbor District Library, MI, who was on the morning panel with Marwell, said additional models were needed.
"I think the new model would be a different value proposition if there was also a much more expensive, limited-term, unlimited simultaneous use license, because we would pay a lot of money to be able to meet that demand all at once even if it means we would have no access after the year is up. That's what the demand curve is like for us."
Neiburger said that having the ability to get the books to many readers on day one—instead of one reader at a time with a limit of 26 circulations—would promote book sales.
"That's why you've got authors now who are finding they are making more money at 99 cents than they are at $9.99. When they have the ability to make that choice, it's happening. They are selling more than ten times the volume at one-tenth the price. I think there's a place for a bunch of different models depending on the pieces of content..... [and] the ability to select not just different titles but different licenses with those titles would be a really big step forward."
However, Marwell did not completely buy the argument.
"Our concern...[is] the potential for legions of buyers becoming borrowers, and that simultaneous use would play into that concern."
Constructive dialog
But panelists and audience members alike expressed a commitment to having a dialog as the transition to ebooks continues. Ken Wiggin, the Connecticut state librarian, told LJ that this type of event, with the publisher and librarians in the same room, was a good start.
"I was really pleased he [Marwell] came," Wiggin said. "You've got to give the publisher credit for sending someone to a roomful of librarians who have some concerns and issues.... [H]e was willing to listen and indicated that as a company they [see]... this is a starting point and that there may be other options. He seemed to hold steady on a few of their points, but I think there's room for negotiations, and that's what's really important."
Mike Shontz, an account executive for OverDrive who was also on the panel (along with LJ collection management editor Barbara Genco), told the audience that HarperCollins has played a constructive role for a long time, and he, too, said dialog was more effective than boycotting.
"Taking these hardline stances is not helping libraries gain more rights," he said. "HarperCollins was one of the very first publishers to have digital rights back when this wasn't cool. They helped create this market and there are some publishers who don't even play, and the only way to get them to play is to negotiate, to work with the publishers," he said. "The more dialogue you have with the publishers the better off you are as librarians."
Marwell said HarperCollins was ready to talk.
"We're here because we want to have a dialog with your community. You're very important to us, you've been important to us for a very long time. I don't think our commitment has ever wavered to the library channel."
In a separate presentation earlier in the morning and during the panel discussion, Neiburger said that beyond dialog, libraries will need to build up their storage capability and their distribution infrastructure in order to deal with the challenges of ebooks and other disruptive technologies.
"We need big servers and the geeks to take care of them," he said. "Geeks who work for you and not your vendor."
