Of the People, By the People, For the People

In his blog on The Bookseller, John Pateman talks about a new operational model for libraries that is being trialled in Suffolk - handing over library management to volunteers.

Well, for some time now, I've been watching what's been going on in the High Street; major chains disappearing and more and more charity shops replacing them, with 'superstores' and also niche stores specialising in furniture, white goods, even designer labels. I think this is the next retail revolution, driven in part by the likes of Freecycle, Gumtree and Ebay that make second hand culturally acceptable. Tatty furniture is rebranded as 'shabby chic' and old T shirts with holes in are 'retro'.

So why shouldn't more services go the same way? I think libraries are an excellent example. The hub of the community, libraries offer free access to literature for all, so why shouldn't they be managed and run on the same basis? The population is ageing rapidly and we have a growing group of people who want a third career, would often be happy to volunteer and have a lifetime of management and operational experience to bring.

I guess the trendy phrase is 'social enterprise', but it amounts to the same thing; of the people, by the people, for the people, as Number 6 would say.

Cutting Out the Middle Man

Fanseyeview reports that Amazon and authors are cutting out the middle man, in this case the publisher.

Well, in every market we see a long term trend of price wars at the retail end squeezing margins across the whole supply chain. As an ecosystem, the publishing world produces a few gems and a lot of noise, for example the ever-increasing pile of self help books from minor celebrities.

For a few years, the print end of the supply chain has reduced costs, through digital technology, then a move to Asia and China, where we can get a 250 page book printed in relatively small quantities for £0.78 (about $1).

While it's easy to focus on the greedy retailers such as Amazon and their cut-price-to-win-market-share-at-publisher's-expense strategy, we shouldn't overlook the role of distributors who are still looking for 50% of cover price to hold stock for a publisher.

The evolution of any market in this state is "disintermediation", or the cutting out of the middle man.

However, it is easy for people to see the publisher as the middle man, and say that with self publishing, who needs a publisher?

Duh....

Self publishing means that the author becomes the publisher. And then, instead of writing, or talking to readers, or holding signing events, the author spends his or her spare time managing orders, maintaining ISBN records, designing book covers, formatting manuscripts, setting up pages on Amazon, setting up distribution arrangements, locating niche retailers and all the other things that we do as a publisher.

So disintermediation can't take out the publisher. Remember, this is the publishing industry. You can't take bakers out of the bakery, all you can do is get the baking process closer to the customer.

In the case of publishing, you can't get the reader any closer to the author, otherwise the author would never sell any volume of books. Having read a few news stories, blogs and other commentaries on the subject, it seems that most people overlook the fact that the author's work is not the book, the book is a physical product that the publisher creates to convey the author's work into the reader's hands.

Projects like Unbound are not a revolution in publishing, and they don't replace a publisher. Unbound is a publisher, they just have a different business model, as outlined in my previous post.

Print costs are rock bottom. Cover prices and sell prices are rock bottom. Who do we cut out? The people who actually turn the manuscript into a saleable book? Or the people who take a cut just for moving the book from one place to another?

Why is Amazon moving into publishing? Because they know that it's the retailers and distributors who are the middle men.

Publishers Still Control the Book Market

Once again, The Bookseller provides us with an interesting snippet of news about the progression of the publishing industry.

"Despite the collapse of two of the world's largest high street book chains the book publisher Penguin lost only £36m in sales in the first half of 2011, while profits narrowed marginally. Digital sales made up 14% of its overall business, resulting in total sales of £64m at a growth rate of 128%"

Despite the collapse? That would be like saying that despite the collapse of Marks & Spencer, sales of woolly jumpers were down only 5%, or despite the collapse of Tesco, people have surprisingly not starved.

I think that what this demonstrates is that the major publishers have the upper hand with the book stores. Clearly, the majority of Penguin's profits were generated as a result of its own marketing, not because readers go into book stores and have a browse around. When a reader wants a particular book and they find that Borders has disappeared, they just go somewhere else. Let's face it, people haven't stopped decorating just because Focus has gone. Our local focus now has a sign on it directing customers to the nearest B&Q.

I think that this demonstrates that the major book stores are just a shop window for the major publishers. Mind you, that's what I've been saying for the past ten years.

The only reason that book retailers like Waterstones buy books from self and independent publishers is to prevent the likes of Amazon from owning that share of the market; a market that is fast growing. Let's not kid ourselves that they actually support authors who choose not to publish with the dinosaurs.

What Penguin have demonstrated is that the retailers can fight amongst themselves; it really makes no difference to the book market.