ROBGO.ORG

January 20, 2012

I watched Apple’s announcement about their textbook offerings with great interest yesterday. It’s a market that I’ve been following for a long long time and one where I have pretty strong feelings. A couple quick thoughts from my vantage point:

1. The $15 pricing is not nearly as disruptive as one would think. Here’s why: A typical textbook publisher essentially takes their cover price on a title and divides it by the number of years in circulation to get the effective revenue per title per year. High school textbooks cost about $70-$100 to schools. Divide that by the typical 5-year period they are in circulation, and you get ~ $14-$20 per year per title. From a publishers standpoint, Apple’s $15 annual price isn’t a big change, so they are going to be pretty happy. $15 sounds like a nice number, but it doesn’t really change the equation much. It just amortizes the cost across the life of the book. College textbooks are much more expensive than K-12 books, and new editions come out much more frequently. I think you’ll see major college textbooks offered closer to the $50-$80 range, which is basically what digital books are going for now at Coursesmart.

2. I’m a big believer that education and content should become more open. Pricing is one component of openness, but it isn’t the only one. I’d argue that Apple’s moves are an attempt to make educational content LESS open. Think about it – Apple is still going to anchor its content around the big publishers which essentially represent an oligopoly. These publishers spend hundreds of thousands of dollars per title to produce content that is essentially undifferentiated from what you could find on the open web. I’ll bet that this Apple partnership will be designed to strengthen publisher’s stronghold on education, not loosen it. Moreover, if Apple is successful, you’ll also see another new gatekeeper introduced into the ecosystem on the distribution side, namely, Apple itself. I think Apple’s objective through this move is actually to drive greater adoption of its iBooks business and market share for its own devices. This doesn’t have that much to do with education, it has everything to do with increasing market share for Apple and tightening the grip that publishers have on an already captive market.

3. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves here. iPad penetration in schools is still miniscule, even in higher ed. Apple announced that 1.5M ipads are being used in “educational institutions”. There are over 80M students in the US. I think we will get to a place where over 50% of students or more will have access to a computer or tablet, but we aren’t there yet. I’d also like to think that students will have some choice on what devices they use and there is some healthy competition in this market.

4. All that said, Apple being apple, crafted a very inspirational vision about what educational content should look like. I’m glad that they are setting a high bar – I believe in this wholeheartedly.  Personally, I think educational content should be:

  • No-brainer affordable for everyone
  • Up to date
  • Presented in a variety of formats to fit different learning styles
  • Extremely high quality
  • Modular so that it can be personalized by instructor
  • Modular so that it can adjust to the pace of learning of individual students
  • Social. I believe any student studying about photosyntehsis should be able to interact with other students studying the same thing (by the way, it shouldn’t matter if you are studying from the same book.)
  • Provide students the ability to go extremely deep and also move across topics with the same ease as they do on the internet

Apple’s new platform promises the ability to do many of these things.  But not all. I don’t think some of these are possible as long as the content layer is controlled by a few very large publishers.

5. Overall, I think we are witnessing the end of a very archaic period in education. It’s baffling to me that over 10 years since the death of physical encyclopedias, we still rely on essentially the same format to communicate information to students today.  We’re seeing progress, and I think it has been accelerating significantly in the past 3 years.

  • Anonymous

    I just got through having kids in Lower, Middle, and High School. And what struck me was that their textbooks weren’t very good.  Slick, yeah, but good, not so much.

    I think the Kahn guys are missing a bet – an open source Algebra II book?  Sign me up – my sons was terrible and riddled with mistakes.  At free I’m more forgiving of that.

    -XC

    • Anonymous

      Thanks Cliff. There are companies working on this :)

      • Anonymous

        Well, sure there are.  Can’t throw a rock….

        I’m just hoping by the time I have two in college this is all straightened out.

        -XC

        • Anonymous

          It will be, sooner than that I hope :)

          • Anonymous

            Gonna have a Junior and a Freshman in High School next year.  The next phase of my life is rushing at me.  In a good way.

            -XC

  • http://twitter.com/WaltFrench Walt French

    I guess Apple, by reserving the Guggenheim for a few hours, somehow kept Amazon, Google, B&N, Sony and a whole host of others from promoting *their* vision for an open plan to substitute THEIR products for all the dead trees.

    Or maybe, they monopolized the educational effort by setting up deals with the Big 3 textbook publishers. Except that wasn’t Apple’s call exclusively; the publishers could have *continued* to use Adobe’s book creation software (probably a minuscule percentage of their expenses, even if not free), and gone to Amazon or whomever.

    Except that they didn’t. Somehow, a long distance call all the way to Seattle was too much work. Or they called but got laughed at when they asked Amazon not to compete with them if they wanted a deal.

    Still looks to me like the textbook market is MUCH MORE open than it was a week ago — think especially of tech institutes, private schools and others where even a single course on an iPad would work economically — but that nobody else wants to bother creating a decent solution that would work for the people who are needed. Anyway, there’s still time: Microsoft could ride in as the white knight!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Glen-Raphael/749878721 Glen Raphael

    It may not disrupt the traditional textbook business YET, but it’s almost immediately transformative for the schools.

    Paper books are expensive to print and ship and store in large numbers so publishers would lose a lot of money if texts were printed without some sort of large pre-commitment to buy. So under the status quo, The Way Things Are Done is that publishers negotiate huge bulk purchases with an entire school district at regular intervals so they know how many books to print, don’t get stuck with unsold copies rotting in warehouses and can minimize shipping costs. The downside of this system is that you get one-size-fits-all textbooks aimed at a generic class situation and all the teachers are stuck with using them. Because they’re bought in such bulk and so infrequently and via a political process, it’s not a very competitive field and not all that responsive to changes in the needs at the classroom level.

    If we switch to Apple’s world, the shipping and printing and storage costs effectively drop to zero so most of the incentive to commit in advance to huge bulk purchases goes away. In that world *each individual class* might freely use whatever book is best for their needs at that moment. You could switch textbook publishers every year at zero cost, or use different publishers in alternate classes!

    Being able to almost costlessly switch texts at any level of granularity – the district, the school, the classroom, even the individual student – should really shake things up. Any time any publisher makes their book marginally better or marginally cheaper, they’ll be able to slice off a share of the market. Over time, books will get more specialized and higher quality and, yes, cheaper. Standard texts for “no more than $15″ today gets the camel’s nose into the tent. but it’s an awfully big camel.

    • Anonymous

      Good points. However, what you are describing does assume a world where the hardware is widely available, which isn’t cheap. If not, a school or district still needs to buy books! I’m hoping we get there, but it’s not without real cost for the foreseeable future.

  • http://www.seo-writer.com SEO writer

    Disruptive?  of course not.  Disruptive is when you have a revolution, a revolt – when you first tear things apart, and then rebuild from scratch (or close to scratch).  This is evolution.  People are already familiar with the concept of e-books, so the idea is not new.  And paper textbooks are not being piled in a heap and burned, so people have that choice (at least for now).

    The real question is whether Apple will be successful.  E-books will be, no doubt.  Can a more generic platform out-perform Apple?  Maybe?  But Apple has been immensely successful with the Mac, The MacBook, the iPhone and, well, maybe with this.

About Me

Coordinates

David Biesel




 GenuineVC

Lee Hower




 AgileVC

NextView Twitter Stream

  • robgo: Just checking out http://t.co/ZvLmK3iq pretty cool. Will use next time I give a gift!
    1 hour ago
  • leehower: my partner @davidbeisel with another post on NextView's Ethos - what Tribe means to us http://t.co/SLSAh4LT
    7 hours ago
  • davidbeisel: We're continuing posts on our NextView "Ethos" with one I wrote today on Tribe: http://t.co/ZQSZu57F
    14 hours ago

Search