> If KCLS is limited to one digital copy of each new title, and then has to wait eight weeks before being able to purchase more, patrons could conceivably wait

> If KCLS is limited to one digital copy of each new title, and then has to wait eight weeks before being able to purchase more, patrons could conceivably wait years rather than months for their eBook. That's a curious statement because if they can buy more copies after 8 weeks, then if patrons have to wait years it's because the library didn't buy enough copies after 8 weeks, and not because of the 8 week embargo. Here's more detail about what the actual embargo is and what the real issue is. Libraries can get one copy at half price with unlimited lending terms during the first 8 weeks. Then after 8 weeks they can buy as many copies as they want, but it costs full price, plus it's not a purchase but a rental that expires after 52 lends or 2 years. https://www.panoramaproject.org/news/2019/7/26/macmillan-announces-library-ebook-embargo-new-lending-terms https://www.panoramaproject.org/news/2019/7/26/macmillan-ann... > Under the publisher’s new digital terms of sale for libraries, "library systems" will now be allowed to purchase a single—that is, one—perpetual access e-book during the first eight weeks of publication for each new Macmillan release, at half price ($30). Additional copies will then be available at full price (generally $60 for new releases) after the eight-week window has passed. All other terms remain the same: e-book licenses will continue to be metered for two years or 52 lends, whichever comes first, on a one copy/one user model. A Macmillan spokesperson confirmed to PW that the single perpetual access copy will be available only for new release titles in the first eight weeks after publication—the option to buy a single perpetual access copy expires after that eight week window, and the offer is not available for backlist titles. The letter from the CEO in the above article also explains that the unlimited lending of one copy is to fulfill libraries "archival mandate". It also gives a hint as to the leverage that a library boycott potentially has: > Macmillan’s library ebook revenue increased 800% over the last five years, with libraries now making up 45% of the publisher’s total digital reads. However the problem, according to Foy, is that while libraries make up 45% of Macmillan’s ebook reads, those digital-lending reads account for only 15% of their revenue. So, a total boycott by all libraries (which is not the case... yet) will reduce overall book revenue by 15%. This potentially would be made up for by additional non-library sales assuming at least 1/3 of the library readers buy the book instead of checking it out from the library, which is not certain. If the library readers simply pass on the book then that kills off 45% of the total readership for new books, including reviews and buzz that drives more sales. What actually happens remains to be seen. It will be an interesting experiment to see.