Letters to the Editor

Editor,

This letter is in response to Dr. Lancy’s guest column in the previous issue of the Statesman. I think it is fair to the readers to let them know of his apparent bias on the issue of used books. Dr. Lancy, as many of you know, writes the textbooks which a great number of USU students read. Most may not know that Dr. Lancy does not allow used copies of his materials to be sold on campus. He must get a significant source of his income from the sale of his materials and doesn’t want to lose that income, which the university students supply to him.

His arguments are driven by bias. I’ve taken enough economics courses to know that used textbooks do not destroy the textbook industry. With lower returns on investment to authors and publishers due to sale of used textbooks, the less productive authors and publishers will be forced to drop out of the industry, leaving behind the publishers who are most efficient and the authors who write the best. This increases the quality and lowers the overall costs of our textbooks.

As the amount of textbooks sold becomes more concentrated to fewer authors, those authors will not have a problem with selling their books arguably just one year. The increased volume of sales will more than make up for their costs. Most authors make small changes to the text and then create a new edition, dupe professors into buying the improved edition, which will be sold to a new generation of students for “one year” and so on and so on.

I don’t feel sorry for the authors at all when I buy a used copy of their text. I would rather benefit students and the university by buying used textbooks than benefit some author who probably receives more income than students do anyway. If buying used textbooks makes me feel sorry for professors, I will donate the difference to the “underpaid professor fund” and give it to quality teachers who make a profound difference in students’ lives, not the ones who write the most books.

Mike Campbell