It was a seemingly innocuous situation… I was sitting in a room filled with publishing types: book publishers, librarians, agents, industry press, metadata specialists, and consultants of varying shapes and sizes. We were there in an advisory role to one of the digital publishing conferences. Read the rest of this entry »
Tags: a&c black, acblack, Amazon, Amazon Kindle, App Store, Apple, Barnes & Noble, bloomsbury, Bloomsbury Publishing, Books, Business, continuum, Digital Publishing, DRM, E-book, ebooks, Electronic publishing, Evan Schnittman, Filedby, Google, google ebooks, HarperCollins, idealog, Ingram, iPhone, iTunes, Kindle, mike shatzkin, Peter Balis, publishing, Publishing and Printing, Self-publishing, shatzkin, shatzkin files, walker books, Writers Resources
Last week Amazon announced that the third generation Kindle became the best selling single product in their history! (http://bit.ly/dOL8AQ) Triangulating this news with an insider rumor insider claiming that Amazon sold over 8 million Kindle’s last year puts the Kindle in the same sales range as the iPad. One has to wonder what the reaction in Cupertino to this shocking bit of news. Read the rest of this entry »
eBooks and the Science Community: My ScienceOnline 2011 reading list | Kylemilhoan's Blog
on Jan 14th, 2011
@ 5:05 am:
[...] Amazon’s Newest BFF [...]
Colin Crawford
on Jun 14th, 2011
@ 7:59 am:
It will get very interesting once Amazon releases Android based tablets later this year.
[Reply]
Tags: Amazon, Amazon Kindle, App Store, Apple, Barnes & Noble, Blackberry OS, ebooks, Evan Schnittman, Google, IBook, iPad, iPhone, Kindle, Macintosh, Nook, publishing, Sony Reader, Trade Publishing
As many of you know, I made a move from academic to trade publishing over the summer. The transition has been fascinating, and I think the last 3 months have been the most exciting in my career as my role has shifted from strategic licensing at OUP to overseeing all sales and marketing at Bloomsbury. In my new job I have already participated in nearly every imaginable trade business scenario: retailer terms negotiations, international sales & distribution deals, book launches, author tours, agent negotiations, and even a Man Booker winner.
Perhaps most interesting about my new role is that I am one of the few people in my industry who runs sales and marketing operations on both sides of the Atlantic. Seeing how London differs from New York in trade is fascinating, but what has struck me most is the prevailing zeitgeist regarding world English rights. The proposition that one publisher should NEVER be sold world English rights for a work seems to have become the default position, especially by UK based agents. Read the rest of this entry »
Mark
on Oct 26th, 2010
@ 12:14 pm:
Evan, I notice you mentioned you launched Jacobson in Canada. I was unaware that you had an office in Canada. What did you do in that market? Anything? What about Australia? I am asking because — and I am being 100% sincere — the commonwealth is a big place and you are in trouble the moment you start-off posting about English world rights with a discussion of the US/UK split that implicitly excludes the rest of the world.
Acquiring global rights is fine as long as retail channels and marketing can be executed locally. But retailers aren’t set up to sell globally. And marketing these days involves more “caretaking” a title and “shepherding” it through the vagaries of the market in question than it does promotion. You need local people to deal with local problems.
We need a (more) frictionless world market before signing world rights truly makes sense.
If you did have a campaign for Jacobson in Canada, I would be interested in reading a post about how that went and how you made the synergies work.
Best regards,
~mb
[Reply]
Evan Reply:
October 26th, 2010 at 1:03 pm
Mark:
First very good and important points all.
For starters, we do publish in Canada and Australia. Publishing doesn’t necessarily require an office, it requires a commitment to the market either directly or in conjunction with an appropriately positioned partner. In Canada we are deeply partnered with Penguin Canada for all print book sales (ebooks we deal directly in all markets). In Australia we currently partner with Allen and Unwind – which is a longstanding and ever evolving partnership. In fact, we are preparing to open our Sydney office as I type… our MD has begun hiring and is signing a lease this week.
As a publisher with its original and deep roots in the UK, we understand the Commonwealth is far greater than just the UK. However, books originated in UK are more often than not sold with commonwealth rights. This is a historical fact and has no bearing on the point I was trying to make. The separation of US and UK rights was in fact an argument about the separation of US and Commonwealth rights.
We are set up to exploit our own ability, and the ability of our partners, to execute a global sales and marketing campaign. To wit, our gross sales into Canada of The Finkler Question are running about 25% of US gross sales. Considering that we have the #14 NY Times bestseller and Canada being just above 10% of the base population, I think our strategy with Penguin is doing gangbusters.
Clearly we are not feeling the friction you think exists.
[Reply]
Enabling a Global Marketing Strategy | Digital Book World
on Oct 26th, 2010
@ 12:52 pm:
[...] article was originally published at Black Plastic Glasses and has been reprinted with Mr. Schnittman’s [...]
Ginger Clark
on Oct 26th, 2010
@ 7:11 pm:
Hi, Evan: I’m a literary agent who handles British Commonwealth rights to our children’s list here at Curtis Brown (NY). I’m going to be talking about books for kids now since that’s what I handle primarily, but I think a lot of my points apply to the adult market as well. I’m also going to be repeating a lot of what Mark said, but less succinctly, I’m afraid.
I have sold Commonwealth rights to books; North American rights (I have my own list of clients as well); World English rights; and in the past year I’ve done a half dozen Australia/New Zealand deals. That was a relatively new thing for me, but I’m very glad I’ve taken that step to separate out those rights from general British Commonwealth when possible. That’s because the ANZ market is more similar to the US than the UK market is to the US. Fiction for 12 and up took off sooner and has been a lot bigger in ANZ than in the UK (though that is changing). Another reason I started separating our these rights is because I saw how much money was to be made in Australian sales–and how little our clients would be making because of low export royalties.
I’ve also experienced what it’s like to sell a book to a publisher in one country and then see it published by their partner in the other, if the partner did not buy the rights but either took copies or decided to partner with them. I can tell you–it rarely works out well for the author in the secondary country, unless that other division has put money on the table.
I’d consider doing a World English deal with a publisher, and maybe even sell them a few foreign languages if they had partners or divisions in those countries, as long as my client could count on the following:
Full, fair royalties for that country. No small percentage of net sales–I want list price based royalties. I might even want separate accounting by country–so are you going to tell me how much of the advance you a portioning to which country? I know that the royalties will be lower for translation sales. That’s fine–I just want what my brilliant colleague here Dave Barbor would get me if he sold the book via our fantastic subagents in that particular country.
An enthusiastic editor who did not have this title foisted upon her by bosses or colleagues. An enthusiastic editor who fell in love with this book on her own and decided she had to have it. I also want a marketing team that is likewise excited of their own accord.
Speaking of that editor–hopefully, I will also get an editor for my client who will know the exact right translator, should this be in a foreign language. The translator for THE FINKLER QUESTION will not be the right one for a young adult novel. An editor will know the difference. An actual editor, in an actual office, in that country. Not just the, say, German equivalent of your distributors and sales force at Penguin Canada.
And finally, I’d like to make sure we get a cover that works for that market. A worldwide cover for THE FINKLER QUESTION obviously worked for that book. But it’s not going to work for every market. I’m not even asking for my client to have cover approval–I want the editor who fell in love with this book in that country to figure out the cover.
Agents reading this are probably laughing, as they know no publisher would let me have contract provisions regarding these points, should I sell Commonwealth or translation rights to a publisher instead of handling them myself.
So you see my dilemma. What worked for THE FINKLER QUESTION is not going to happen as much as we would all like. My job is to find the right homes for my clients, both in the US and abroad–and to partner with subagents in other countries to find them homes there, as well. I do not believe that the clients of mine who have had translation sales have lost out on some kind of opportunity. Rather, they have found the exact right homes in those countries, thanks to the fact that we kept the translation and Commonwealth rights.
[Reply]
Evan Reply:
October 27th, 2010 at 6:43 am
Ginger, thanks for this smart and professional comment. I will agree that there are always exceptions to the rules and having two strategies is sometime better than one. But to reverse your argument on itself – what worked for The Finkler Question can and SHOULD work for most of what is published. If most of what is published in trade is, by all empirical evidence, completely unsuccessful – meaning about 80% of trade books never earn out the initial advance – then what you describe above is at BEST working for only 20% of trade books published.
I stand by the notion that we are dividing and diluting the potency of what we do as an industry by talking ourselves into believing we have a sustainable and workable model. We dont. One day the bottom will fall out and all we will have is divergent strategies and covers that supposedly work only in local markets.
Thanks!
[Reply]
James Gill
on Nov 5th, 2010
@ 9:25 am:
Dear Evan (if I may),
This is all fascinating for me — in general as one of those on whom this “logic” is lost, and in particular as the agent that the piece refers to.
It’s tempting to post here a less partisan and more accurate version of certain events than your account relates, but I believe it would be wrong to do so. Wrong because it would be unfair to my client the author of this wonderful novel, wrong because it would be unfair to the excellent and deeply committed publishers who were successful in acquiring the book with a vision, strategy, passion and logic of their own. But mostly just wrong because it would drive a bus through the niceties of (well, previously at least) generally understood professional confidentiality in our business — in a way that I’m afraid your piece does.
Best wishes,
Jim
[Reply]
Tags: Amazon, Amazon Kindle, Bloomsbury Publishing, Books, Digital Publishing, ebooks, Evan Schnittman, Howard Jacobson, Kindle, Man Booker Prize, Oxford University Press, publishing, Trade Publishing
Last week in The Bookseller, Philip Jones covered a seminar in the UK by Enders Analysis that presented data done as a part of a Nielsen BookScan report. The article led with the following statement.
“The growth in e-book sales in genres such as romance and science-fiction is leading to a cannibalisation in sales of printed books, according to Nielsen BookScan data.”
This led to the inevitable debate on the Read2.0 listserv (also known as the Brantley List for the devoted followers of Mike Shatzkin). While there was little illumination in the ensuing voluminous discussion, there was an overall consensus that ebooks were indeed cannibalizing print books. Read the rest of this entry »
Eoin Purcell
on Sep 27th, 2010
@ 10:58 am:
Evan,
I don’t see how this makes much difference other than semantics. The two critical facts from the presentation were:
1) Specific genre saw e-sales go up
2) Same specific genre saw p-sales go down
It is thus seems clear that ebook sales were driving down sales pbooks. All of which equalled cannibalization.
Now in the medium to long run you may very well get those ebook buyers to buy more ebooks than they ever did pbooks (and thus increase the overall revenue of the genre), but those sales are definitely affecting pbook sales.
Whether you decide that that’s people’s doing or the fact that ebooks are now available, the result is the same, pbooks sales fall because of ebooks/people who read ebooks.
I remain unconvinced though that this will result in a profitable expansion of the market for current publishers
Eoin
[Reply]
Go Read This | Ebooks Don’t Cannibalize Print, People Do « Black Plastic Glasses | Eoin Purcell's Blog
on Sep 27th, 2010
@ 11:00 am:
[...] via Ebooks Don’t Cannibalize Print, People Do « Black Plastic Glasses. [...]
Scott Walker
on Sep 27th, 2010
@ 11:19 am:
The unbundling of content from medium causes both an evaporation of formerly accessible value and the creation of new value opportunities.
This article highlights the emphasis consumers place on the services wrapped around the content, which is where all of the new value opportunities are emerging.
[Reply]
Moni
on Sep 27th, 2010
@ 2:00 pm:
I have long debated print v ebook and am on the verge of ‘giving’ in to ebook readers. As a librarian, I am somewhat torn. As a systems librarian/webmaster, I keep wondering what my problem is.
But you justified it right here: “Because ever since I started using a dedicated ereading device and platform I have found the convenience of having all the books I am reading and want to read all in one device far more convenient than toting around one print book at a time.”
I bought 5 print books at Borders yesterday, because I had convinced myself that I prefer print! But this morning I noticed, I can’t bring ALL of them to work. But I could if I had an ereader. Although I prefer reading a print book, they are not as “convenient” as an ebook.
Thanks for the article!
[Reply]
Joe Hauer
on Sep 27th, 2010
@ 2:11 pm:
I just bought 2 kindles, one for me, one for my wife.
I have purchased 2 books I already own for the same reasons; adding one reason, for the ability to search the book.
I am actually trying to keep myself from buying another book that I am reading in printed form as an ebook, solely to see if I can keep myself from buying the ebook.
I am trying to convince myself that I will continue to buy printed books, but I am not so sure that will be the case.
If the economy made it as easy for people to buy ereaders as it did during the boom to buy ipods, the transition would be faster.
In any case 100% agreed, it is not cannibalization. Also and aside, I would not stop if the ebook was the same price as print. I do not mind paying for books that are worth the money, whatever format they are in.
[Reply]
Corey Podolsky
on Sep 27th, 2010
@ 3:39 pm:
Great post Evan. Although I think that the debate of digital cannibalizing print misses the overall mark.
Your posts suggest that overall book sales should be rising; a percentage of book buyers no longer buy print, but that segment will purchase more books overall, albeit digitally. This could only be bad for the Industry if ebooks are sold at a substantial discount to Print.
It would be very interesting if Nielsen BookScan (or someone) would do a follow up study on the price elasticity of ebooks relative to print. If ebooks were priced on par with print, would ebooks buyers continue to purchase more books?
I would bet yes, that the convenience would still win out.
Digital cannibalizing Print is too simplistic. The focus should be on convenience, price and the price elasticity of demand of the various formats.
[Reply]
scott
on Sep 27th, 2010
@ 9:11 pm:
Um. With this same argument, digital music didn’t cannabalize CDs people owning ipods did.
I’ve certainly bought more music on my ipod and iphone than I did before, but I’m paying a lot less for it too.
If the music business is any inidication of the future of ebooks… watch out publishers.
[Reply]
John
on Sep 28th, 2010
@ 3:39 pm:
What you’ve said is pretty much the exact same for me too.
Wish more books were available digitally and in Canada.
[Reply]
eBooks provide benefit across the publishing value chain | Michael Gracie
on Sep 29th, 2010
@ 7:46 am:
[...] Evan Schnittman notes, the growing investment in readers makes eBook version availability a must: Ebooks aren’t a [...]
On Publishing Economics & Canabilsm | Eoin Purcell's Blog
on Sep 29th, 2010
@ 8:27 am:
[...] Schnittman has an interesting analysis in which he posits that ebooks are not the issue, it is the changing way people interact with books when they sh… and that it’s not such a problem in the medium to long run: The good news is that the same [...]
Matt
on Sep 29th, 2010
@ 5:31 pm:
Great article. I too, have purchased an ebook while having the print book. I felt stupid doing it, but it’s just too darn convenient. The survey that says 80% would never consider buying an ebook is only because they don’t know any better. They’ll come around.
I really have trouble understanding why textbooks are slow coming around. I understand that it will decimate backpack sales, but that’s not the publishers problem.
[Reply]
Irfon-Kim Ahmad
on Sep 29th, 2010
@ 7:03 pm:
I’ve had an ebook reader for some time, and this is entirely true of me, but I’d say that my case is even more advanced.
By and large, if a book isn’t released as an ebook, I just won’t buy it. I would say that for fiction that’s been 100% true for some time now. And so I do browse for titles to buy on the ebook stores, and ignore what’s not available in the format.
Recently, an instructional book on a very narrow topic came out — it’s a unique book, in fact. As far as I know no other book on this topic exists, worldwide. I knew about its release far in advance because I’m very involved in the small, tightly-knit community from whence it came. As such, I bought the print edition. When it arrived, I started to devour it, and for the first evening was delighted. Since then, I’ve had to force myself to read it one other time but otherwise it’s gathering dust. Recently the ebook edition was announced as forthcoming, and I will almost certainly buy it as soon as it arrives.
However, a bigger demonstration of what you’re talking about comes in other non-fiction books that I’ve been purchasing for work lately. I didn’t even look at Amazon and other sites that specialize in print books, even though the selection is larger. I’ve looked exclusively through ebook sources. And in the case where I couldn’t find one that fit my criteria (in particular, all the ebooks on the subject were out of date), instead of conceding and buying a print book, I decided to find free websites to read up on the subject from instead. So absolutely if there is someone out there who had a more recent book on the subject, by not having it available as an ebook they lost a sale right then an there.
I’ve pretty much learned my lesson now, in fact. I doubt I’ll buy any more print books in the future, no matter how interesting they may look. The reality is that I just don’t read them, and they sit on my bedside table in an ever increasing pile, making me feel guilty. And what’s the point in that, when instead I could buy a good ebook and actually read it?
[Reply]
Three fledglings that really should fly – The Shatzkin Files
on Sep 30th, 2010
@ 6:53 am:
[...] a recent blogosphere conversation sparked by Evan Schnittman’s observation that the impact of the ebook shift could be an expansion of the …, Eoin Purcell wrote about the commercial impact of readers shifting from ebooks to print. Purcell [...]
Jim
on Sep 30th, 2010
@ 11:43 am:
I think it would be helpful if BookScan confirmed that the same retailers reporting in 2009 were also reporting in 2010. If not, then the YOY analysis is distorted.
[Reply]
Paco Prieto » La servilleta dominical, edición 03.10.01
on Oct 3rd, 2010
@ 10:21 am:
[...] (localizado a través de @javigoto). Y en la otra mano un recordatorio sobre el hecho de que No és el ebook quien “canibaliza” el libro impreso. Son las personas, los usuarios quienes responden a un mercado, a una industria, a unas tendencias,… si éstas [...]
Michael Allen
on Oct 4th, 2010
@ 2:24 am:
Yes, owners of Kindles etc *do* buy — when we can get it. Often, I find that I can’t. Case in point: today, found reference to David Sedaris’s Squirrel Seeks Chipmunk. This is available in Kindle in the US, but not in the UK. Am I going to buy paper version? No. Am I going to look up my local library? Maybe. But the most likely result is that I shall just read something else on my Kindle. As far as I am concerned, and I may be an odd type of reader, publishers are losing potential purchases from me on a daily basis. Most common reason: ebook price is absurdly high, causing me to mutter two words. Second reason: they haven’t even had the wit to publish a Kindle version at all. Which, come to think of it, is par for the course from our forward-thinking, innovative IK publishers.
[Reply]
MRW
on Oct 4th, 2010
@ 8:18 am:
“I really have trouble understanding why textbooks are slow coming around. ”
For most books, simply transferring the text while maintaining paragraph structure is enough. Textbook publishers are used to paying attention to graphics and page layout. Few e-book readers can display color graphics (some don’t even do a good job with grayscale). Few e-book readers have sufficient screen size to display the same page layout as a textbook – and even if they did most e-book formats wouldn’t preserve the layout anyway.
Additionally, the markets are very different. Assuming comparable profits per book (flawed, but bear with me), publisher benefit if the total sales increase, even if the print book sales decrease. In the fiction market, the existence of e-books increases total sales even as it decreases print sales. In the textbook market, I doubt this will be true.
[Reply]
Kindle, eBooks continue to take over book sales « Kindle Review – Kindle 3 Review, iPad Review
on Oct 13th, 2010
@ 5:22 am:
[...] Schnittman writes that eBooks don’t cannibalize Print, People do - I posit a slightly more nuanced definition of what is [...]
Alison
on Oct 15th, 2010
@ 12:30 pm:
I have hardly bought a printed book in a year, and I used to be a big consumer (witness my dusty bookcases.) I now either buy the book as an ebook, or get it from the library. With the Amazon Kindle samples I can try out a book. If I like it a lot I buy it. If I think it’s ok, I check it out from the library. The big exception is knitting books. I still buy those in print.
[Reply]
Why we should get ready for a plunge in print book sales, by Peter Ginna « Readersforum's Blog
on Dec 18th, 2010
@ 4:19 am:
[...] p-book sales on a one to one basis, as my colleague Evan Schnittman points out in his post “E-Books Don’t Cannibalize Print, People Do.” Evan argues that once you have adopted an e-reader–whether it’s Kindle, Nook, or your [...]
Tags: Amazon, Amazon Kindle, Apple, Barnes & Noble, Books, Business, Cambridge University, Digital Publishing, E-book, ebooks, Evan Schnittman, Hachette, iPhone, Kindle, MacBook Pro, publishing, Publishing and Printing, Trade Publishing
In my last post, What’s Next in Digital Reading I explored my notion that there are three kinds of reading; extractive: immersive, and pedagogic. Extractive reading works in digital form as finding and extracting data and information is optimized by the power of digital. Immersive reading struggled to flourish in digital form until the e-ink screen went mainstream with the release of the Kindle. Pedagogic reading, the kind done when learning from a textbook, has yet to take hold as there hasn’t been a device and/or business model for delivering lesson-based reading that has gained any traction. However, this is all about to change dramatically because of the iPad. Read the rest of this entry »
Chipp
on May 5th, 2010
@ 10:57 am:
Though I disagree with your “clues”, your conclusion is interesting.
First off, you need to check your facts. Apple and iPad are not providing the suite of productivity tools freely. They are paid for apps, just like on any other OS, and their cost is substantially lower than commercial suites, and higher than free ones.
Furthermore, as anyone who has used Apple’s productivity suite of tools knows, there is a huge amount lacking in them– namely the ability to move a file from your iPad to another device– or sync it in any way. Long way to go before it really is “productive.”
Second, the iPad can certainly be used to access porn. And it’s done just like every other computer does it– through the browser. It’s all just a URL away. As you correctly point out, Steve is just trying to toss Android under the bus, along with Google, Adobe, Flash, Verizon, developers and a whole host of other people he’s spoken ill of publicly recently. Not very becoming for a CEO.
One reason I believe there will be no large scale adoption of the iPad in Education markets is because folks in Education know they cannot count on Apple to be a good partner. Do you think Steve would accomodate their wishes? For instance, If they need the iPad to have a USB slot so kids can load their homework assignments? Nope. But, on the other hand you can be sure Android tablets will have such a feature.
Another concern with Apple is the concept of a single source supplier. Apple can dictate pricing and usage plans with zero competition. But if an Android tablet is used, there will be HP, Asus, Dell and a host of other suppliers of the hardware, and the software will be much easier to write for and deliver, because it can be created in Flash or bunch of other HDE (High Level Development Environment) which allow developers to write apps faster and with less bugs. Unfortunately, Steve has limited the development of iPad apps to only his Objective-C toolkit– which is not an HDE. There are many more programmers available to program for Android than there will be for iPad.
Google Apps on Android will be much better suited for education as all the data is stored in the cloud. And of course Kindle and Nook and the rest will also be on Android, along with a huge amount of Flash educational content which won’t play on iPads.
So, in the end, I disagree with your hypothesis. Apple knows it cannot compete in education, and is not targeting it as a primary market for iPad.
[Reply]
Evan
on May 5th, 2010
@ 11:19 am:
Thanks for catching the glaring misunderstanding on my part – yes, the iWork isn’t free, each App is $9.99. The point still remains, though one now has to spend $30.
[Reply]
The Daily Square – Lay Low for the Letdown Edition | Booksquare
on May 5th, 2010
@ 9:15 pm:
[...] The iPad: Gateway Drug to Digital Learning?This is reasoning we can get behind: the lack of adult material, the mix of entertainment and learning. [...]
debbie
on May 10th, 2010
@ 2:06 pm:
Not sure how else to submit this question to you, so I’m going to tag along with the Ipad comments.
I watched the Cspan-2 broadcast over the weekend with you among a panel of others discussing electronic publishing. On the topic of (type of) edition bundling, you and one or two others repeated the idea of purchasing first a hardcopy then being able to add-on the download for a reduced price. In the software world, it’s more typical to purchase the download with a small add-on fee to receive a hardcopy by mail.
My primary interest in e-reading is to reduce the amount of “stuff” I have to maintain, store and move from one place to another through my life. Of the titles I would purchase, I am far more likely to choose an e-publication first, and then only purchase hardcopy editions of the materials that I would find worthwhile (by my personal definition) to own in that form.
I’d be interested to hear more about why the hardcopy-first method of bundling would be preferred, if indeed that is the case.
Thanks.
[Reply]
Thoughts from across the Publishing Blogosphere « Kindle Review – Kindle 3 Review, iPad Review
on May 19th, 2010
@ 11:57 pm:
[...] Evan Schnittman at Black Plastic Glasses has finally started writing again and he makes two excellent points. [...]
ezautoshippers
on Jun 18th, 2010
@ 9:08 am:
I agree that the iPad is a great gateway “drug”. If the majority of kids think something is cool than they are going to be more prone to use it. And we all know that the iPad is the cool thing right now with a lot of people. This isn’t to say that next week, month, year something else won’t be out there that is cooler than the iPad. So hopefully this can be a catalyst to a new age of learning.
As far as Apple not being a good partner in education, I don’t agree with that comment. My school had some of the first Apple computers in the state of Illinois, and I was lucky enough to be a part of that program. My daughter is now in the same school district and they have computer labs in every school full of Apple computers. The corporation has been a good partner with education in my area. Hopefully we are not the exception to the rule. As far as schools getting the iPads that doesn’t seem to likely in the near future with the sales going the way they are. It is always better to sell than donate.
[Reply]
Jane Brown
on Jul 1st, 2010
@ 5:02 am:
I can’t really agree with what you said about ipad beeing a getaway drug, because even if it didn’t exist, kids still wouldn’t be reading books. Sadly, that’s the way things are these days :/
[Reply]
sunshyne
on Jul 12th, 2010
@ 5:53 pm:
Jane is correct, my wife and I had a 2 hour discussion on how and why the current crop of kids is a lost cause. You should see some of the resumes that come across my desk. Unreal how some of them are even able to find their way home. I do like the take of the online book store to take on the kindle so I guess the conclusion can be reading digital media is still better than not reading at all. Pax et bonum
[Reply]
Stephen Hull
on Jul 15th, 2010
@ 11:54 am:
Correct me if I’m wrong (someone doubtless will) but wasn’t there a significant test of the iPad on a number of campuses this past academic year? I believe the data showed students — some undergrad, some in professional schools — overwhelmingly did not like using the iPad as their textbook e-reader and note-taker. Evidently a large percentage quit the test anywhere from three to eight weeks into the semester and reverted to print textbooks and note-taking on their laptops. I have no idea what this means for the future of the iPad as a higher ed curriculum platform; probably just that Apple and Pearson will learn a few lessons and adapt as necessary. But I think it does indicate that the iPad, at least in its present iteration, is not automatically a magic bullet, killer app for the higher ed market, regardless of how cool it is for entertainment uses.
[Reply]
Tags: Amazon Kindle, App Store, Apple, Cengage, Digital Publishing, Digital Reading, ebooks, econtent, Entourage eDGe, Evan Schnittman, Google, Higher Education, Houghton Mifflin, iPad, iPhone, iPod, iTunes, Kindle, McGraw-Hill, Pearson, publishing, Textbooks, Trade Publishing, Wiley
© 2009 Black Plastic Glasses. All Rights Reserved.
This blog is powered by Wordpress and a guitar player's Blues Licks website.
Array
meg white
on Aug 1st, 2011
@ 7:33 am:
you may be going mainstream, but you’ll never be ordinary.
[Reply]
Martyn Daniels
on Aug 1st, 2011
@ 8:06 am:
Evan probably one step behind you for different but silimliar reasons
Still have a lot to say and input but it like watching the children grow up – sometimes you have to let go
Martyn
[Reply]
Jack W Perry
on Aug 1st, 2011
@ 9:39 am:
I am sure we will hear many of your thoughts in the various other venues. Good luck and look forward to you r next blog.
[Reply]
David Worlock
on Aug 1st, 2011
@ 11:48 am:
Evan Well , I have loved your work on this site , and I think your new glasses are an improvement . But as to your point ? Well , I have known that we were living in a digital first world since 1985 and the revolution in science and professional publishing . The frustration has been that general consumer entertainment publishing workflow and marketplaces took so long to catch on – and always assumed that they were somehow ” publishing ” in essence . So lets drop digital – and lets drop “publishing ” with it !
Thanks for great arguments sustained over the years ! David
[Reply]
Jay Huldeen
on Aug 11th, 2011
@ 8:15 am:
Evan, my dear friend, you went corporate back in 1986. I’m glad you have finally realized it.
It would be interesting to hear your musings on the how the effective transfer of control of ‘content’ (what a dreary word when the emphasis is on the first syllable!) from the old order to the digerati will affect our culture generally. Do you think we will continue to get stupider, or are you hopeful that somehow there will be a recovery of real literacy? Or am I simply wrong in my premises?
The new glasses are very corporate, and a good look for you. Please let us know where to find your new blog.
[Reply]