17/08/07
Green Spin
It’s not often that I commend the publishing industry on a brilliant piece of tactical maneuvering. But I have to say that the recent spinning adopted [subscription required, sorry] (by John Makinson among others) to justify abolishing sale or return terms on environmental grounds is absolute genius:
Penguin c.e.o. John Makinson has mooted a move to firm sale on backlist titles in the UK as a possible part of Penguin’s “green” policy. Makinson’s fellow panellist at the seminar, Alastair Sawday of carbon neutral Sawday Publishing, would welcome an industry-wide firm sale policy. “The returns system is an ecological disaster, and a financial one,” he said. “Booksellers who know their market shouldn’t need to return books.”
The sale or return system was first introduced into publishing in the US during the Great Depression. The idea was adopted in the UK a few years later, initially as a temporary measure.
Professor Iain Stevenson, director of University College London’s Publishing Centre, said: “It’s an enormously wasteful system, with books being transported back and forth across the country. I am not sure it is good for the trade as it produces a lot of lazy buying decisions.”
Sale or return has plagued the industry for years - it’s an anachronism that is redolent of selling tinned goods post-rationing in the 1950’s - but the brilliance of suggesting it be ditched on environment grounds is a master stroke. Lots of other publishers jumped on board the suggestion immediately, of course (it’s a win:win situation for them), and the retailers are for once painted into a corner. Hurrah! (And it may also have positive environmental impacts, of course.)
Should retailers reject the concept they’ll be tainted as unenvironmental, polluting and backwards. And given that most people find it much easier to draw a mental line from a tree being chopped down to a book being made than they do for the swathes of forest cut down for the chips in your iPhone - the Environmental Question is probably one fight that booksellers don’t want to have right now. Not if they’re sensible anyway.
I’m pretty sure that publishers don’t on the whole give a hoot about any environmental issue, but it was very clever to see this opportunity and to grab it.
Of course, retailers will find a way to put the sting back in the tail, possibly through some creative endeavour such as a few percentage points additional discount, or marketing fees for this and that. But for once, it’s genius. Well done all.
← When HMV Shuts Up Shop - Then What? // Apt’s links for August 16th through August 17th →
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
# Comment by Publishing Insider @ 10:18 pm, August 17, 2007:
“Lots of other publishers jumped on board the suggestion immediately, of course (it’s a win:win situation for them)”
I don’t think you understand backlist/midlist (i.e. most) publishing. Suggest you read The Long Tail lol
x
# Comment by Peter Collingridge @ 7:19 am, August 18, 2007:
Publishing Insider - I think you’re probably right: in this context I don’t understand the relevance of midlist/backlist and the environment (although I have read the Long Tail a few times). Can you explain what you mean for us? Cheers!