<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Noodleplay &#187; publishing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ideacouture.com/blog/tag/publishing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ideacouture.com/blog</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:01:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Old Media, Old Habits</title>
		<link>http://www.ideacouture.com/blog/2009/12/14/old-media-old-habits/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ideacouture.com/blog/2009/12/14/old-media-old-habits/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:00:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Lee</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Models]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategic Innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disruption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[publishing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ideacouture.com/blog/?p=3381</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Quick... our business model is broken... let's go back to what's worked before... a long time ago.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Media companies seem to be falling over themselves trying to prop up revenues in an ever-changing environment.  Yet, there seems to be very little innovation in how they’re going about it.</p>
<p><a href="http://ideacouture.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Thanks_Giuseppe_Bognanni.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-3396" title="Thanks_Giuseppe_Bognanni" src="http://ideacouture.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Thanks_Giuseppe_Bognanni.jpg" alt="Thanks_Giuseppe_Bognanni" width="335" height="500" /></a>For the last several weeks, much has been written about Rupert Murdoch’s plans to de-index from Google and put up pay walls for News Corp’s digital media properties.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><em>Variety.com</em> (the Hollywood trade publication) has also announced that it will revert back to erecting a pay wall for its content.  <em>Variety.com</em> had this model in place as recently as 2007 when it decided a pay wall didn’t work.  Well, I guess that was then…</p>
<p>And now, we have three major publishing houses announcing that they will hold back e-book versions of some titles, making them available several weeks to several months after the initial launch of the hardcover.  Hey, movie studios have been doing that for years, right?</p>
<p>Finally, the major music labels have announced that they will cease the production of all recordings, digital or otherwise, and force people to attend live concerts if they want to hear their favorite music.</p>
<p>OK, I made that last one up.</p>
<p>Where&#8217;s the innovation?  It&#8217;s undeniable that traditional media companies are under a lot of pressure to hold on to their revenues.  Some are fighting for survival.  But shouldn&#8217;t such circumstances spark innovation?</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s look at publishers&#8217; plans for holding back e-book versions of some of their titles.  Is it really a good idea to force consumers to buy hardcover versions when so many of them have already demonstrated that they want e-books?  Is it really a good idea to artificially prop up the value of a hardcover, at the expense of making an e-book a less attractive product, when the trend seems to clearly favor e-books going forward?</p>
<p><a href="http://ideacouture.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Thanks_adafruit.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-3393" title="Thanks_adafruit" src="http://ideacouture.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Thanks_adafruit.jpg" alt="Thanks_adafruit" width="500" height="375" /></a></p>
<p>Insights into customer needs (e.g. people want to buy, carry around, and read books conveniently) and foresight into the evolving market (e.g. e-book market is growing very quickly; and every electronics manufacturer and their cousin are readying better, faster, do-more e-readers) should be driving innovations at these media companies.</p>
<p><a href="http://ideacouture.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Thanks_garryknight.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-3402" title="Thanks_garryknight" src="http://ideacouture.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Thanks_garryknight.jpg" alt="Thanks_garryknight" width="333" height="500" /></a>Instead, they seem to be gripped by the fear that consumers who grow accustomed to paying $9.99 for an e-book won&#8217;t want to pay $25 for a hardcover.  That may be true.  But what exactly are they hoping will happen?  That consumers who have already invested in an e-reader, and who have already been enjoying e-books, will be willing to pay a premium for a product they don&#8217;t really want?   Or that, by making e-books less attractive for consumers, they will simply forget about them and return to buying big, heavy hardcover books?</p>
<p>The ground around media companies is definitely shifting.  The environment is ripe for innovation.  Some will survive.  Some will not.  But I think the ones that will thrive will be the ones that innovate.  I just haven&#8217;t seen any shining examples of innovation from the incumbents lately.</p>
<p>What do you think?  Am I glossing over any innovations from the big media companies?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ideacouture.com/blog/2009/12/14/old-media-old-habits/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

