BISG Making Information Pay: May 7, 2009

The Book Industry Study Group is pleased to announce that the sixth annual Making Information Pay Conference will be held on Thursday, May 7, 2009, at the McGraw- Hill Auditorium in New York City.

The event will be preceded with an online survey that’s available now at BISG MIP 2009 Survey. The theme of this year’s conference is especially timely and topical—“Shifting Sales Channels.” The landscape for book publishing is changing rapidly; trading conditions have never been tougher and many traditional sales channels are shrinking or disappearing completely.

New sales channels and business models are emerging and many publishers are experimenting and reorganizing to capitalize on them. Making Information Pay 2009 will feature a lineup of book industry leaders sharing their insights into how they are responding to fading markets and emerging opportunities, and will provide practical advice on how companies are dealing with the far-reaching changes impacting the book business. Speakers and a full agenda will be announced at a later date.

All employees at publishers large and small are invited to participate in a nationwide survey to provide their experiences and opinions about the changing sales channels in our industry today. Survey questions cover a range of topics: which of today’s sales channels are trending up or down; what new channels are emerging that look particularly strong or promising; and how are publishers responding to the changes they see around them. Making Information Pay has become one of the leading events in the book industry’s calendar and is attended every year by hundreds of senior professionals eager to hear about new developments in our industry and about practical steps to benefit from them.

This year’s program is being organized in collaboration with The Idea Logical Company, and sponsored with the generous support of several known innovators in the book industry, including Copyright Clearance Center, Ingram Book Group, Klopotek, and R.R. Bowker. The Book Industry Study Group, Inc. (BISG) is the U.S. publishing industry’s leading trade association for policy, standards, and research.

The mission of BISG is to create a more informed, empowered and efficient book industry. Membership consists of publishers, manufacturers, suppliers, wholesalers, retailers, librarians and others engaged in the business of print and electronic media. Learn more about BISG at www.bisg.org.

Roy Blount Jr. and Text to Audio

In an Op/Ed in yesterday's NY Times Roy Blount Jr. current President of The Authors Guild comments on the text to audio functionality of the Kindle 2.

What the guild is asserting is that authors have a right to a fair share of the value that audio adds to Kindle 2’s version of books. For this, the guild is being assailed. On the National Federation of the Blind’s Web site, the guild is accused of arguing that it is illegal for blind people to use “readers, either human or machine, to access books that are not available in alternative formats like Braille or audio.”

In fact, publishers, authors and American copyright laws have long provided for free audio availability to the blind and the guild is all for technologies that expand that availability. (The federation, though, points out that blind readers can’t independently use the Kindle 2’s visual, on-screen controls.) But that doesn’t mean Amazon should be able, without copyright-holders’ participation, to pass that service on to everyone.

Funny, he didn't mention how changing the font size might destroy the market for large print books. I wonder why no one is arguing "hey, you think that mechanized voice was good, how about buying the version read by Jim Dale"

Publishing And Out of Work

Publishers Weekly has put together a long (and possibly growing list) of contact details for people recently laid off from publishing companies. This is quite nice of them.

LINK

Jonathan Galassi Interviewed By Haaretz

Want to know more about Jonathan Galassi and the Macmillan/FSG company then read this article published in Haaretz

"It's really about cutting through the miasma of information to grab the reader's attention. And that is getting harder and harder to do."

Galassi bemoans the way nearly all American papers have cut back their coverage of books. This past Sunday, The Washington Post published the last edition of its Book World as a stand-alone section, leaving The New York Times and the San Francisco Chronicle as two of the few remaining U.S. papers printing separate book-review sections. (In Israel, Haaretz publishes a weekly book review in its Hebrew edition, and the monthly Books supplement in the English edition.)

Galassi suggests that the move is "short-sighted": It may be that book publishers have reduced their newspaper advertising, lowering the profitability of book sections for newspaper publishers, "but you know, a book review is not just about books, it's a forum for discussing ideas, for discussing culture in a different kind of way than you do in other pages." He notes that consumers these days turn to newspapers less for hard news, because they have other sources for immediate news delivery. So newspapers "are much more about context and interpretation." Which is what a good book review section has to offer.

The Shatzkin Files

No not some espionage novel, but Mike Shatzkin who has written here once or twice has joined the blogging community. His blog address is: http://www.idealog.com/blog/ and we will all be look forward to reading his views on the industry. (And it was nice of him to give me a call out).

Here are two of his past posts at Personanondata:

Borders Stickers Books, Why? (Perhaps a coincidence but this got a comment today).

Amazon and Book Pricing.

MediaWeek (Vol 2, No 7): OCLC, Slate, EBook Pricing

For those with a bibliographic bent, ARL has published a short document on the proposed changes OCLC wanted to make to their data use. (Link) A sample:

“Band’s explanation indicates that both are intended as contracts, and describes the various forms and gradations that can characterize a contract as “bilateral” or “unilateral.” The new Policy is clearly intended as a unilateral contract, unilaterally imposed on any entity using records from the WorldCat database, including member libraries. While the 1987 guidelines have also served as a unilateral contract—and have much substance in common with the new Policy—the OCLC-member community has not perceived them as such. The guidelines are both less “unilateral,” in that they grew from a known and more open process of debate, and less “legalistic” in language. With the enormous environmental and technological changes that have occurred in the 22 years (a generation) since the guidelines were introduced, the major differences in tone and language between the guidelines and the new Policy, and a number of significant differences in substance between the two documents, the new Policy cannot be viewed as a mere update describing already accepted practices. The member community has seen the introduction of the new Policy as a fundamental change in the nature of the relationship between OCLC and its member libraries. In the eyes of the community, the guidelines expressed a mutual social contract, and the new Policy represents an authoritarian, unilaterally imposed legal restriction.”

The writers of the report also indicate that the manner and method of OCLC’s policy making needs a revision in thinking. (See when you screw up sometimes the consequences are even bigger than you might anticipate).

The task force applauds OCLC’s recent announcement of delayed policy implementation and the creation of a Review Board on Principles of Shared Data creation and Stewardship. We hope that the Review Board will consider its timeline and process, as well as its recommendations on policy issues, in light of the analyses and findings of this report. We believe that, using as a base the work done to date on the proposed policy and the issues it raises, a fresh start to policy determination and articulation is desirable.

Peter Brantley has a more expansive reaction to the report and its implications. (Link)

And it is there that I feel more caution must be exercised. The research library community, particularly, has now smitten OCLC forcefully upon its head with the flat of Library's sword and advised that it must go back to the schoolhouse. There is a danger of over-reaction in this. It is one thing to tell OCLC that the community believes its licensing policy was a mistake, its tone too “unilateral” and not conversational, and its process (essentially) pig-headed. It is another to envelop OCLC’s management in restrictive committee-based decision-making over matters that are vital to its survival; the times demand effective leadership and far-sighted vision; libraries have too long emphasized diplomacy.

Read Slate's article Not all Information Wants to be Free (Link). It raises and interesting question in my mind: Is Apple iTunes platform a precursor to the Kindle platform?

That iTunes is a free-standing application and not contained inside a browser, as is the Amazon music store, is not accidental, and I reckon that its "outside the browser" design has played some role in its success. Consumers have been conditioned to think that content delivered by a browser is supposed to be free. They get annoyed when they encounter a pay wall on a browser but are more psychologically open to the nonbrowser Web interface.

By thinking outside the browser, Apple answers to nobody but itself when it wants to add features, such as movies and TV show sales and rentals—or when subtracting them. If the browser window is the commons, the iTunes application is Apple's castle, where you're expected to do as you're told.

Some interesting data points in the discussions between Youtube and Music publishers over revenue sharing: (Guardian)

To understand the implications of these terms for closing deals, consider the penny per-stream component. It amounts to $10 per 1,000 streams, or a $10 clicks per-thousand. This means that before the digital company makes any money on advertising it would have to pay the first $10 of the ultimate CPM to the labels, then split what's left 50/50. So, if YouTube were to sell a $20 CPM pre-roll on a music video, it would give the first $10 to the label then keep $5 of the remaining money. That's $15 to the label and $5 to YouTube, or an effective CPM of $5 on a pre-roll ad. That's not going to leave YouTube rolling in revenue, never mind profits. Throw in the fact that it has to pay millions of dollars upfront, and you can see why these talks are so strained.

A very interesting discussion at HarperStudio over eBook pricing. It is the comments that are most interesting. (26thStory) Here is Shatzkin:

Decisions about price aren’t about fairness or equity, they’re about the market. I want to read books on my device. I choose a) from what’s available, b) what I like, and c) considering the price. I remember when I first got this ebook habit nearly 10 years ago, I paid $28 for an ebook bio of Grover Cleveland because (a) was very limited, so (b) got down near zero, and I was wanted to read something so I yielded on (c).

The ebook world is going to change enormously over the next several years. We’re still in a great period of proliferation: of formats, titles, concepts for the books, retailers, retailing “styles”, readers and devices. The Kindle and iPhone have a kind of dominance in the tiny market we have now; they may or may not be number one in what will be a much larger market three or five years from now.

Swan Song for Sir Crispin

Reed Elsevier presented a robust end to 2008 with the presentation of their end of year numbers yesterday. In constant currencies, RE revenues were up 7% over 2007 and operating income was up 12%. Underlying results were slightly less at 4% and 9% respectively.

Reed Elsevier revenues finished the year at £5.3billion and earning per share were up 15% in constant currencies and the press release points out this is their highest growth in 10 yrs. As expected Elsevier, Lexis and Exhibitions all drove revenue and operating income growth and while Reed Business Information was the laggard the business hardly fell off a cliff during 2008.

From the press release:

“Reed Elsevier has had a very successful year with major progress in developing the business, and the strongest constant currency adjusted eps growth in a decade. Good revenue growth was seen across most of the business driven by the growing demand for online information and workflow solutions. The revenue growth and a strong focus on restructuring and cost management delivered meaningful margin improvement and the operating cash generation was excellent. Whilst the economic environment has become progressively more challenging, our business is more resilient than most and we are in a strong financial position.

The year saw demonstrable progress across the business from our continued investment in new content and online product development. In Elsevier, subscription renewals reached record levels whilst other online solutions for the scientific and healthcare communities grew rapidly. Online legal information solutions have continued to expand, and there is growing demand for information analytics in the risk market. In legal research we see significant opportunities for more intuitive and interoperable offerings to enhance customer productivity and are stepping up our investment to reflect this. Reed Exhibitions had an exceptional year including the benefit of non annual shows cycling in. Reed Business Information held up well for most of the year, helped by the strong growth of its significant online franchises. In the last quarter, however, the business increasingly felt the impact on advertising markets of the global downturn.

The year has also seen a major reshaping of our business with completion of the sale of the remaining Harcourt Education businesses and the acquisition of ChoicePoint. ChoicePoint transforms our position in the risk information and analytics sector and the strategic and financial benefits are very attractive. The business has performed well with the insurance data and services business, which accounts for the substantial majority of ChoicePoint’s operating profits, delivering 10% year-on-year organic revenue growth. The integration with our existing risk business is progressing well and we are confident of achieving our savings and returns targets. We were disappointed not to be able to sell Reed Business Information but the macro-economic environment and poor credit market conditions made it too difficult to structure a transaction on acceptable terms. Whilst the short term outlook for RBI is very challenging, RBI is a high quality business, with a strong management team and a record of success in developing online services. It remains our intention to divest RBI in the medium term when conditions are more favourable.

Buried in the report was also the expected news that RE have reduced what was a $300mm (€230mm) investment in Harcourt parent Education Media and Publishing Group (EMPG) to just €15m. The equity stake that RE was forced to take in Harcourt when the business was sold represented just less than 12%. Companies do use their own judgment (there are FASB rules) when re-evaluating the value of third party investments like this one however, this action isn't likely to impress the bankers who lent $7Billion to EMPG for their acquisition spree.

Management Powerpoint Presentation