PDA sales (was: Interview with Springer's Derk Haank)

["Alix Vance" <alix.vance@gmail.com>]

Responding to Sandy (and Michael) .

My recollection of PDA sales at EBL (2004-07) is that PDA 
generated significant volume but that recent titles continued to 
dramatically outsell the backlist. Researchers continue to 
prioritize recent materials -- this holds true for monos, 
particularly in STM disciplines -- which continues to drive front 
list sales. Other than publ. date, one of the biggest drivers of 
PDA sales was discoverability, based on a number of variables: 
critical mass in the collection; MaRC quality; OPAC organization; 
resolver population.

Anecdotally, Z39.50 and full-text searching were supported on 
EBL's platform but were not always supported by the library. This 
proved to be a huge difference-maker when comparing patron uptake 
across libraries. Marketing and visibility have enormous impact 
in e-purchasing platforms (as in traditional print purchasing 
channels via profiling).

Having also been a publisher with ebooks for sale in 
aggregations, I don't personally have evidence that PDA generates 
more backlist sales than traditional marketing/distribution 
channels. Backlist ebooks have an essential place in ebook 
collections and archival platforms. Suffice to say, I haven't 
seen long tail purchasing generate the kinds of top- and 
bottom-line results in library environments that we equate with 
B2C mass markets.

- Alix Vance

__________________________

From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Sandy Thatcher
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 10:42 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: Interview with Springer's Derk Haank

PDA may not mean that fewer books are sold overall, but the key
difference between approval-plan purchasing and PDA purchasing is
when it happens. The former is at or near the time of
publication; the latter can stretch out over years. That makes a
huge difference for any publisher in terms of cash flow.

Sandy Thatcher


>This thread converges nicely with the one on 'Limitations of
>Google Search.' Reports from the field indicate that the economy
>is taking its toll on the sale of large publisher-direct book
>packages to academic libraries.  Even extraordinary discount
>offers are encountering resistance.
>
>The business model for book aggregators in the academic library
>market, from Richard Abel, to Academic Book Center, Blackwell,
>YBP, Franklin, Midwest, Ambassador, Coutts, Casalini,
>Harrassowitz, etc., has been built around "content curation," aka
>"profiling." The profiling process has been a core service to aid
>the efficient discovery and acquisition of content.  As content
>has moved online and technological support has grown ever more
>complex, the number of traditional companies has dwindled even as
>new ones emerge (e.g. EBL, Netlibrary-EBSCO, ebrary-ProQuest).
>
>New technology is giving rise to new models, such as Patron- or
>Demand-Driven plans, also based on profiling, which augment and
>sometimes replace portions of approval notification and books
>plans. The new models do not mean that old ones will disappear or
>that fewer books will be sold, but simply that library collecting
>has more tools at its disposal to meet its responsibilities
>(budgets and the current increased costs of eContent will
>determine whether fewer books will be sold).
>
>Sharp declines in library budgets, extraordinary discounts being
>demanded of publishers for content packages, and emerging
>technologies supporting ever more sophisticated business models
>pose questions to libraries, library consortia, and publishers
>alike regarding the purpose and costs of some large packages.
>As Alix Vance wrote: "there will always be those who seek more
>and better."
>
>Michael Zeoli
>YBP Library Services