Are E-book Big Deal Bundles Still Valuable? Charleston 2014.
33
Are E-book Big Deal Bundles Still Valuable? Charleston 2014
-
Upload
piers-phillips -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
1
Transcript of Are E-book Big Deal Bundles Still Valuable? Charleston 2014.
Are E-book Big Deal Bundles Still Valuable?
Charleston 2014
Milton Friedman
Transitions into the Digital
Library as Laboratory
Workbench to Workforce
A Space Between the Spaces
Campus Life & E-books
Book Lovers (34%) have an inherent affinity for the print form
Technophiles (23%) are strongly interested in the possibilities of new technology as regards the book
Pragmatists (17%) are the most neutral of the four, as they are most interested in content and see pros and cons of both formats
Printers (26%) prefer print books but are distinguished from Book Lovers in that they have specific difficulties with the usability of e-books
Q Methodology & Large N-Survey
1. Aaron Shrimplin, Andy Revelle, Susan Hurst, and Kevin Messner, “Contradictions and Consensus – Clusters of Opinions on E-books,” College & Research Libraries 72, no.2 (2011): 181-190.
2. Andy Revelle, Kevin Messner, Susan Hurst, and Aaron Shrimplin, “Book Lovers, Technophiles, Pragmatists, and Printers: The Social and Demographic Structure of User Attitudes Toward E-books,” College and Research Libraries 73, no. 5 (2012): 420-429.
Acquisition Models
E-book Collectio
ns
E-Approval
PDA/DDA
Title-level
Consortia
Print vs. Electronic Book Expenditures FY11
FY12FY13
FY14
$0.00
$100,000.00
$200,000.00
$300,000.00
$400,000.00
$500,000.00
$600,000.00
$700,000.00
$800,000.00
$900,000.00
Print Expenditures
Total Book Expenditure By Order Type
FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14$0.00
$200,000.00
$400,000.00
$600,000.00
$800,000.00
$1,000,000.00
$1,200,000.00
Print Approval Print DiscretionaryE-Book Discretionary E-Book PDA
The Big Deal Approach
Wiley Platform
Methodology
Wiley Online Books 2012 titles n=927Compiled usage from 2012 through 2014 (January – July) using standard COUNTER BR2 reports
SPSS/Excel/R/Photoshop
The Middle Manager’s Oath
Homer Simpson
Title Use 2012-2014n=927
19%
81%
Titles w/Use Titles w/No Use
Title Use Comparison
Wiley (2012-14)
Springer (2008-10)
Oxford (2008-11)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Titles w/No UseTitles w/Use
E-book DLs
2012 2013 20140
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
476
736
315
DLs for 2012 Titles
Pareto Principle
Pareto Comparison
Long Tail
2011 Wiley E-books with Usage Data
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Titles with 4 or more DLsTitles with 3 DLsTitles with 2 DLsTitles with 1 DL
A Few High Use Titles Dominate
DLs by Book Type - Springer
Mon
ogra
ph
Proc
eeding
s
Contri
bute
d vo
lum
e
Prof
essio
nal b
ook
Text
book
s
Handb
ook/Ref
Wor
k/En
cyclop
edia
Other
05
10152025303540
012345678
% of titles% downloads / % ti-tles
Titles with Usage by Subject
Agriculture
Chemistry
Earth Sciences
Law
Mathematics
Nursing
Psychology
Veterinary Medicine
0 5 10 15 20 25
% of Titles
Percentage of Total DLs by Subject
Agriculture
Chemistry
Earth Sciences
Law
Mathematics
Nursing
Psychology
Veterinary Medicine
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0
% of Total DLs
Value
Our price tag to OhioLINK is not commensurate with use; however, the bundle of titles becomes a better value overtime with additional usage & we own the content
179 titles @ list price = $29,588.88 (average cost per title is $165.30) – we would need to grow the number of titles used by over 50%
High use titles (textbooks)Cost per download is high (~$30.00)
The New Normal
Erosion of Purchasing Power
Conclusions
81% percent of the titles in this study were not used from 2012 – July 2014
Underperforming assetA relatively few high use titles dominate and the long tail accounts or a very small percentage of the total downloads
Textbooks are heavily usedDemand varies across subject areasFiscal challenges
Next Steps
More analysisShrink print / grow eCompare local e-book package value to consortial e-book package value
Does the value of the collection increase with time with additional usage
Questions? Comments?
Jennifer BazeleyInterim Head of Technical [email protected]
Aaron K. ShrimplinAssociate [email protected]
