How Does the Proposed PRH/SS Merger Affect Libraries?

Todd Leopold of Library Journal has written a piece exploring how the proposed merger between Penguin Random House (PRH) and Simon & Schuster (SS), strongly opposed by the U.S. Department of Justice, might affect libraries and writers. The piece is well worth a read but will require non-subscribers to create a free login.

In the piece, “Josh Berk, executive director of the Pennsylvania’s Bethlehem Area Public Library. ‘That’s where my first thought goes: Here comes another price hike’.” He adds “sometimes it feels like we’re an afterthought. Publishers have a good partner in libraries. A little extra consideration would go a long way.” As the piece points out, PRH and SS currently have very similar terms. Indeed, PRH has slightly more favorable prices and a rep has said “There are no plans to change licensing agreements with libraries after the merger is complete.” But as Stephen King points out later in the article, “Consolidation is bad for competition,” he said. (Incidentally, Mr. King, though of course you’ll never read this, are you aware that your most recent audiobook will cost libraries $130.00 for a two year license? It s getting well out-of-reach for many libraries. You’ve proven yourself a great writer, and all of us would love to offer your works, but maybe you could talk with your publisher about giving libraries a more print equivalent deal?) Berk has good reason to be concerned if the deal goes through. PRH and SS may keep the same licensing terms, but that’s no guarantee prices won't go up. Indeed, as the article points out in referencing an RF post, prices are already creeping up across the board. The ALA has been sending representatives to the publishers most years since at least 2014 to talk with the then Big 6 and terms, including costs, have done nothing but get worse. If we see a Big 4 or 3 or 2 or even 1, it seems reasonable to expect price jumps, even though the Bigs have obviously never before competed for library business. We are their reliable cash cow, having to license works due to public demand, a ready source of what amounts to a government subsidy no matter what outlandish prices the licenses might be.

In the piece, Carmi Parker notes “that libraries can adjust with the times. Indie publishers have been more flexible with their ebook arrangements – one, she observed, sold their ebook for $20 with a lifetime license—and if similar measures can be put in place with the large firms, it can benefit all sides. “ But she adds, “the big publishers have to bend a little.” Over the last 18 months, she said, her library system’s costs jumped 30 percent while usage remained flat. Something will have to give. “I believe at this point that libraries must begin to vote with their dollars,” she said.”

Hear hear!

But Parker’s mention of the Indies raises a troubling point. The DOJ case was based in part on established authors being disadvantaged by making less money. Even if the resulting behemoth keeps on many SS employees, will there still be as many people reading manuscripts? Will as many contracts be offered? Will as many new voices, especially diverse voices, get the Big 5 (or 4 or whatever) boost to become established? Better license terms for libraries would certainly help us foreground new voices. PRH has pledged to diversify their offerings, and perhaps they can under a merger, but libraries should worry the overall effect will be to see less diversity and the further pushing of the best seller and commodification of the book. Parker’s emphasis on the smaller publishers and Indies may be our only viable route to sustainable collections. But it is difficult for us to drive new readers to new authors without the publishers.

Overall, if the merger goes through, the devil will as always be in the details of license terms and availability of diverse titles. We would have to see what happens. This merger nevertheless seems a bad idea from the library perspective. The DOJ has at least presented a good case.