I think a fair question to ask is: "How many of the people borrowing these "buzzy" titles" would actually go out and buy a copy if they couldn't borrow it?" Gi

I think a fair question to ask is: "How many of the people borrowing these "buzzy" titles" would actually go out and buy a copy if they couldn't borrow it?" Given the article's claim that very few are actually reading it when they can borrow it for free, the answer is likely very few. People who wish to cast the issue as one of lost revenue would like to think that every one of those "borrowers" in the queue represents a lost sale. The NEL is in a position to provide some data that doesn't directly refute that claim, but certainly suggests that it's wildly overblown.