In Springer Nature’s “botched” IPO, did the market see it as one of the publishers at risk of being left behind by real innovation in scholarly communication and research workflow?
Publishers have shown themselves to be resourceful, navigating troubled waters to growth and profitability.
Instead of the rich and seamless digital library for scholarship that they need, researchers today encounter archipelagos of content bridged by infrastructure that is insufficient and often outdated. Researchers need a supercontinent. Will it be Elsevier, Digital Science, Clarivate, ResearchGate, or someone else? And what does this mean for other publishers?
The recently announced agreement between ResearchGate and Springer Nature, Cambridge University Press, and Thieme demonstrates that there is not a uniformity of perspective in the publishing community about article sharing on ResearchGate, or presumably on the many other scholarly collaboration networks that exist. It also signals that ResearchGate, a decade-old start-up disruptor with with venture capital investment and a rapidly grown user base, has taken its place at the negotiating table and found not just enemies but allies.
Society publishers resist the sale of their publications to bidders from the commercial world because they view the publications as a central component of the society itself.
Love it or loathe, blockchain is making the headlines everywhere! But what exactly is it? Does it really have a role to play in scholarly communications? If so, what and how? In this interview, Joris van Rossum (Digital Science) and Martijn Roelandse (Springer Nature) answer these questions and more.
Research publishers may acquire textbook publishers in order to increase market share in libraries with inclusive access programs
In the shift beyond content licensing and towards supporting researcher workflow, Elsevier has few competitors. A key question is whether Digital Science and SpringerNature should be understood strategically as one company, or two. Who owns Digital Science?
23andMe presents an interesting model for STM publishers on how to enter a new and lucrative market for data publishing.
The open access megajournal is a proven success, but its future may lie in the hands of commercial entities.
As growth in content licensing slows, sophisticated content providers are building businesses supporting researcher workflow and university business processes.
Although Amazon is a central player in many areas of publishing and media, it is hard to predict where it will head next. This makes it hard to plan to compete with it. On the other hand, Amazon has some typical ways that it behaves when it enters a market and strategic planners can learn from them.
Although we in scholarly publishing typically focus on the problems we face, there is a small group of highly successful journal publishers. These publishers fall into three broad categories. To a great extent, these publishers are resistant to challenge.
Professional societies are facing growing resistance to place their publications in libraries. This results in these societies seeking arrangements with the largest commercial publishers, whose sway with libraries and especially library consortia is significant. Libraries have demonstrated a clear preference to work with the larger publishers over the smaller ones. This leads to increasing concentration and market power in the academic publishing industry.
A recent article about the publishing industry confuses the various business segments and offers prescriptions that are largely irrelevant to the task of running a publishing enterprise.