Eric Frank Interview Notes - October 22, 2009: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: ''Conducted with Erhardt Graeff via telephone on October 22, 2009, '''concerning Flat World Knowledge's business plans and approach to OER/textbook publishing.''''' == In...) |
(→Notes) |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
== Notes == | == Notes == | ||
===History of Flat World=== | |||
* 30 years of experience at big 3 publishers (left Pearson for FWK) | |||
* Not a open-source bone in their bodies | |||
* Hadn't felt an impact of openness on EM sectors | |||
* Believe the industry was broken and not address audiences adequately (practical pain points) | |||
** '''Students''': paying too much for what they were getting in return; being treated as a captive audience (buy new or used, still expensive decision), not being treated like a consumer with real choices | |||
** '''Faculty''': cost issue (out of empathy or self-interest--students are buying required books/versions); CONTROL ISSUE: no two faculty teach the same way: all rights reseved textbooks are black boxes; and publishers were trying to solve business issue on backs of faculty of studentsânew editions that change curriculum | |||
** '''Authors''': working increasingly quickly (revisions come faster) and watching royalty statements erode | |||
* Bookstores and Universities concerns were less relevant to them | |||
*: OPINION: They need to re-do their business models to deal with disruptive internet technology, too | |||
===Business Plan === | |||
====Creating an Open Access Business Plan==== | |||
* First Draft: Let's build lots of cool stuff to engage students in education more | |||
* Games, highly interactive learning modalities, JIT content, massive multiplayer problem-solving games | |||
* This wouldn't resolve pain people are currently feeling | |||
* After 30 years of seeing innovative product launches fails | |||
* Don't compete at the higher end of learning because its too disruptive (people see its value but don't adopt) | |||
====Final Draft: Resolve Immediate Pain Points==== | |||
* Embed assessment in rich content but don't pitch as assessment-based learning (change educators styles) | |||
* Build textbooks in same ways with additional efficiency | |||
* Add value to World-Class Authors | |||
* Make competitive w/ major publishers | |||
* How is it different than McGraw-Hill | |||
** open set of tools | |||
** open license | |||
** open source | |||
* Expect authorship and production + open license and open tools | |||
* Addresses Faculty Issues | |||
* Transferred control back to faculty members with adopting versions as needed and custom textbook creation | |||
* For Students | |||
** Device agnostic as possible | |||
** Simultaneous formats available | |||
** ePub files and iPhone applications planned for the future | |||
** Had long interviews with current students about what they wanted | |||
*** Formats and Price points | |||
*** Facebook free the textbook APP to test FWK's prototypes | |||
*** 2000 students surveyed | |||
*** 20 university courses adopted beta version of books | |||
***: Monitored in class use | |||
* SURVEY: Most students buy | |||
** 45% said would buy B & W book | |||
** Lower numbers are actually buying books | |||
** 60% are actually buying something | |||
=== Success Rates === | |||
* B & W print book is most popular (98% of all book sales) | |||
* Color books are almost never purchased (offering costs nothing additional to FWK) | |||
* PDF files very successful, but more purchasing at individual chapters | |||
* Audio is still an experimental offering | |||
* Base of students with eReaders is almost non-existant | |||
*: All file formats are important | |||
=== Future Services/Ideas === | |||
* Maintain flexibility | |||
* Not sure about future | |||
* Long-term strategy? | |||
* SIDE NOTE: Left in spring of 07, prototypes in spring of 08 | |||
* After making open access commitment, you are in good position to be responsive to market | |||
continue to build and offer new services | |||
** p2p tutoring service (fee-based) | |||
** Marketplace for user-generated study aids | |||
** Possible ad sales to job recruiters for leads in field-relevant textbooks | |||
** "Packaging" is a profit source currently | |||
* Focus has been on getting great authors, producing strong core content | |||
* Secondarily, website usability experience | |||
* Need to focus more on study aids | |||
* Consciously positioned themselves as a publisher (an open publisher) | |||
===Licensing IP=== | |||
* Core content is CC | |||
* All supplements are All Rights Reserved | |||
** Probably will be changed in the future to flexibility | |||
** Study aids will likely always be copyrights for students | |||
** Flat World is creating value-added | |||
** Access is for other creators | |||
** Core textbooks dominate profit margin | |||
** BW Books + Study Aids package = BW Books alone purchases | |||
==== CC BY-NC-SA Rationale ==== | |||
* Non-commercial | |||
** Financial model for authors: great royalties | |||
** Market share beyond normal book (open content) | |||
** NC is clause to protect that model | |||
** Some books cost hundreds of thousands to become marketable | |||
** Money should go back to FWK if its out there | |||
** Anybody could come along and turn around and sell it | |||
** Amazon will always be better distributed (could take “these excellent books” and republish them through their site) | |||
** Don't think they would have signed any authors without NC clause | |||
** This is important for both ideological and financially motivated authors | |||
* Share-Alike | |||
** Is a perpetuator of NC clause | |||
===Marketing Approach=== | |||
* Believed that you don't need sales rep army | |||
* Not true if your product is highly differentiated (other publishers compete for relationships with faculty members on similar products) | |||
* They 5 sales reps and direct marketing (a lot on the web, generating leads) | |||
* Message | |||
** Open Textbook is still equated largely with low quality | |||
** Name recognition of authors is important for uneducating and re-educating professors | |||
** Author Branding + Packaging (review books are color printed for professors) | |||
* 40,000 students using FWK books | |||
** Six books for Fall semester 2009 | |||
** 30 university classes last spring testing books | |||
** 480 classes this fall | |||
===Profile of Adopting Universities=== | |||
* Problem for high-cost textbooks is ubiquitous | |||
* 1) four-year public colleges, 2) Community Colleges, 3) private universities | |||
* Each book has its own market for schools and classes though | |||
* Author and Title | |||
** Tax book: all community colleges | |||
** Micro-economics: ivy league school | |||
===FWK as Platform=== | |||
* FWK has been approached by some publishers to be a platform and distributor of their content | |||
* More likely than not that will go into that | |||
* They founding members in the Connexions Consortium | |||
* Linux/Red hat relationship would be interesting | |||
===Relation to Bookstores and Universities=== | |||
* FWK's attitude is that there is room for them to play together | |||
* But they are launching a new model and their pricing is at one cost | |||
* Need to retain value-added | |||
* If bookstores want to add value at local level | |||
** Not going to enforce list prices | |||
** BUT, Draconian return policy for bookstores (must cover cost of publishing because its on-demand) | |||
* Become print-on-demand solution (send them digital file and keep production costs and environment hit by transportation costs) | |||
* Bookstore has tried to convince Professors not to adopt FWK because of profit hit | |||
* Universities aren't excited about seeing revenues dry up from loss of bookstore sales | |||
* SIDE NOTES | |||
** McGraw-Hill is partnering with Chegg | |||
** Cengage has its own rental system | |||
===Perspective on OER Projects=== | |||
* They think of themselves as “Commercial” OER | |||
* Creating a lot of noise and atmosphere of change | |||
* Great initiatives that we can work alongside them (maybe long-term Red Hat / Linux) | |||
* Worry over excitement for peer-produced textbooks (Connexions doesn't display adoption in the marketplace) | |||
* If OER brand is tainted by disjointed products through interaction with sub-par Connexions material that hurts FWK's marketability | |||
* Participation is in usage not in creation (Wikipedia percentages) | |||
** Is the way content created an ends or a means? | |||
** We think its a means (pragmatic) | |||
* But if they could quickly created a Principles of Economics book through an open participation interface they would do it | |||
= Navigation = | = Navigation = |
Latest revision as of 13:48, 26 October 2009
Conducted with Erhardt Graeff via telephone on October 22, 2009, concerning Flat World Knowledge's business plans and approach to OER/textbook publishing.
Interviewee
- Eric Frank
- Co-Founder and Chief Marketing Officer, Flat World Knowledge
- Email: eric [at] flatworldknowledge [dot] com
Questions
- Content Development Strategy
- Partnerships w/ OER or Larger Publishers?
- Major Successes to date
- Sales rates
- What part is educating profs/teachers? Is this marketing?
- Where do the majority of your profits come from?
- Do you see anyone else in this same space that you are competing with?
- How are you getting the word out about Flat World Knowledge? Salesmen like trad. Pubs?
- Why the specific CC license?
- Are all materials licensed as CC BY-NC-SA?
Notes
History of Flat World
- 30 years of experience at big 3 publishers (left Pearson for FWK)
- Not a open-source bone in their bodies
- Hadn't felt an impact of openness on EM sectors
- Believe the industry was broken and not address audiences adequately (practical pain points)
- Students: paying too much for what they were getting in return; being treated as a captive audience (buy new or used, still expensive decision), not being treated like a consumer with real choices
- Faculty: cost issue (out of empathy or self-interest--students are buying required books/versions); CONTROL ISSUE: no two faculty teach the same way: all rights reseved textbooks are black boxes; and publishers were trying to solve business issue on backs of faculty of studentsânew editions that change curriculum
- Authors: working increasingly quickly (revisions come faster) and watching royalty statements erode
- Bookstores and Universities concerns were less relevant to them
- OPINION: They need to re-do their business models to deal with disruptive internet technology, too
Business Plan
Creating an Open Access Business Plan
- First Draft: Let's build lots of cool stuff to engage students in education more
- Games, highly interactive learning modalities, JIT content, massive multiplayer problem-solving games
- This wouldn't resolve pain people are currently feeling
- After 30 years of seeing innovative product launches fails
- Don't compete at the higher end of learning because its too disruptive (people see its value but don't adopt)
Final Draft: Resolve Immediate Pain Points
- Embed assessment in rich content but don't pitch as assessment-based learning (change educators styles)
- Build textbooks in same ways with additional efficiency
- Add value to World-Class Authors
- Make competitive w/ major publishers
- How is it different than McGraw-Hill
- open set of tools
- open license
- open source
- Expect authorship and production + open license and open tools
- Addresses Faculty Issues
- Transferred control back to faculty members with adopting versions as needed and custom textbook creation
- For Students
- Device agnostic as possible
- Simultaneous formats available
- ePub files and iPhone applications planned for the future
- Had long interviews with current students about what they wanted
- Formats and Price points
- Facebook free the textbook APP to test FWK's prototypes
- 2000 students surveyed
- 20 university courses adopted beta version of books
- Monitored in class use
- SURVEY: Most students buy
- 45% said would buy B & W book
- Lower numbers are actually buying books
- 60% are actually buying something
Success Rates
- B & W print book is most popular (98% of all book sales)
- Color books are almost never purchased (offering costs nothing additional to FWK)
- PDF files very successful, but more purchasing at individual chapters
- Audio is still an experimental offering
- Base of students with eReaders is almost non-existant
- All file formats are important
Future Services/Ideas
- Maintain flexibility
- Not sure about future
- Long-term strategy?
- SIDE NOTE: Left in spring of 07, prototypes in spring of 08
- After making open access commitment, you are in good position to be responsive to market
continue to build and offer new services
- p2p tutoring service (fee-based)
- Marketplace for user-generated study aids
- Possible ad sales to job recruiters for leads in field-relevant textbooks
- "Packaging" is a profit source currently
- Focus has been on getting great authors, producing strong core content
- Secondarily, website usability experience
- Need to focus more on study aids
- Consciously positioned themselves as a publisher (an open publisher)
Licensing IP
- Core content is CC
- All supplements are All Rights Reserved
- Probably will be changed in the future to flexibility
- Study aids will likely always be copyrights for students
- Flat World is creating value-added
- Access is for other creators
- Core textbooks dominate profit margin
- BW Books + Study Aids package = BW Books alone purchases
CC BY-NC-SA Rationale
- Non-commercial
- Financial model for authors: great royalties
- Market share beyond normal book (open content)
- NC is clause to protect that model
- Some books cost hundreds of thousands to become marketable
- Money should go back to FWK if its out there
- Anybody could come along and turn around and sell it
- Amazon will always be better distributed (could take “these excellent books” and republish them through their site)
- Don't think they would have signed any authors without NC clause
- This is important for both ideological and financially motivated authors
- Share-Alike
- Is a perpetuator of NC clause
Marketing Approach
- Believed that you don't need sales rep army
- Not true if your product is highly differentiated (other publishers compete for relationships with faculty members on similar products)
- They 5 sales reps and direct marketing (a lot on the web, generating leads)
- Message
- Open Textbook is still equated largely with low quality
- Name recognition of authors is important for uneducating and re-educating professors
- Author Branding + Packaging (review books are color printed for professors)
- 40,000 students using FWK books
- Six books for Fall semester 2009
- 30 university classes last spring testing books
- 480 classes this fall
Profile of Adopting Universities
- Problem for high-cost textbooks is ubiquitous
- 1) four-year public colleges, 2) Community Colleges, 3) private universities
- Each book has its own market for schools and classes though
- Author and Title
- Tax book: all community colleges
- Micro-economics: ivy league school
FWK as Platform
- FWK has been approached by some publishers to be a platform and distributor of their content
- More likely than not that will go into that
- They founding members in the Connexions Consortium
- Linux/Red hat relationship would be interesting
Relation to Bookstores and Universities
- FWK's attitude is that there is room for them to play together
- But they are launching a new model and their pricing is at one cost
- Need to retain value-added
- If bookstores want to add value at local level
- Not going to enforce list prices
- BUT, Draconian return policy for bookstores (must cover cost of publishing because its on-demand)
- Become print-on-demand solution (send them digital file and keep production costs and environment hit by transportation costs)
- Bookstore has tried to convince Professors not to adopt FWK because of profit hit
- Universities aren't excited about seeing revenues dry up from loss of bookstore sales
- SIDE NOTES
- McGraw-Hill is partnering with Chegg
- Cengage has its own rental system
Perspective on OER Projects
- They think of themselves as “Commercial” OER
- Creating a lot of noise and atmosphere of change
- Great initiatives that we can work alongside them (maybe long-term Red Hat / Linux)
- Worry over excitement for peer-produced textbooks (Connexions doesn't display adoption in the marketplace)
- If OER brand is tainted by disjointed products through interaction with sub-par Connexions material that hurts FWK's marketability
- Participation is in usage not in creation (Wikipedia percentages)
- Is the way content created an ends or a means?
- We think its a means (pragmatic)
- But if they could quickly created a Principles of Economics book through an open participation interface they would do it
Back to Contacts for EM
Back to Educational Materials