News

Hudson hits out as Deloitte sells stock

01.01.70 | Philip Jones

The Publishers Association has accused Entertainment UK's administrator of adding "insult to injury" by offering stock to retailers, despite a previous agreement allowing publishers to reclaim their books. The PA brokered a deal last month with administrator Deloitte so publishers could reclaim books from Entertainment UK's warehouse. Publishers had to provide the administrator with details about the stock owed and what they wanted to collect.

However, supermarkets and high street retailers have been approached by Deloitte in the past week and offered stock from EUK. In a spreadsheet seen by The Bookseller, the total retail value of the books held is more than £10m. The list offers more than 5,000 ­different titles, including the current ­number one When Will There Be Good News? by Kate Atkinson.

Ian Hudson, president of the Publishers Association and deputy c.e.o. of Random House, hit out at the decision to approach retailers without the Publishers Association's knowledge. He said: "The administrator deprived us of the opportunity to get access to stock before Christmas and sell it at full value. It's pretty poor behaviour to then add insult to injury by claiming that they own the stock and they can therefore make it available for sale with no benefit to suppliers or the authors."

Under the terms of last month's agreement, publishers are able to reclaim an estimated 60% of the stock held by EUK. Ownership of the remaining 40% is under dispute: the administrator has still not recognised full retention of title. Hudson said: "I don't believe that they are entitled to dispose of this stock in this way. We are making absolute claims over this stock."

Since the agreement, major distributors had been speaking to Deloitte to reclaim stock on behalf of their owners and client publishers. It is unclear how much stock has been reclaimed, if any. Distributors have previously said that they have been held up by establishing exactly what stock is left, confirming how much is owed and arranging the physical collection of stock.

A spokesperson for Deloitte declined to comment on the PA's claims. But he did say: "We are continuing to sell off the stock held in the warehouse."

Comments: Scroll down for the latest comments and to have your say

By posting on this website you agree to the Bookseller comments policy. Comments go direct to live please be relevant, brief and definitely not abusive. Report any "unsuitable comments by clicking the links"

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first | Readers' most recommended

By Nigeio

Surely one look at the recurring headlines of this website offer an altruistic solution. Deloitte should make the books available at these deep fire sale prices to the library community. Get great retail stock into libraries without the retailer margin in a one-off exercise without damaging the high street retail supply chain. If one thing that prat Coates rambles on about is true is that getting good retail stock in without the wholesalers taking their cut is a worthwhile one-off exercise. And, before anyone asks, please don't tar me with anything to do with Coates as I think he's a blot on the industry landscape. But I can agree on one point (can't I?).

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By Commentator.

What world do you live in ?You are clearly a librarian , out of touch with the real world and terrified of the reality wake up call that Tim Coates is trying to bring into your self serving protectionist environment.
Your suggestion would damage the publishers, retailers and library suppliers...and in anycase you would need to spend more than the value of the "free" books in selection committee costs .

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By RDavies

So why is the retention of title not recognised on the 40%? What makes it different?

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By Nigeio

No, not a librarian but I do use libraries. I struggle to find good books in stock and the helpful staff (low paid it must be added) sympathise saying that there is little budget for new books. Why would it damage publishers pray tell? Why would it damage library suppliers? You roll out the mantra without obviously looking at the facts. A one off injection of stock like this is a no-brainer. Getting people back into libraries increases stock turn increasing revenue for authors improving etc etc Improving the market as a whole which - with reference to the article above - Deloitte are completely shafting. Nobody is a winner in the current set of circumstances (except Deloitte, their drone 'consultants' and the managers earning a good bonus). At least the infusion into libraries is a positive outcome from this mess. Oh, BTW Coates is still aEdited, you've made this point once already Nigeio, you don't need to repeat it. In general, we ask users to refrain from personal abuse. Thanks..

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By COMMENTATOR

Well NIGEO, where do I start ?
It is bad for publishers because this suggestion would rob them of turnover , because you would advocate substituting free books . Also of course money is still owed on these books in the first place , so you are generously giving away somebody elses goods .
It is bad for library suppliers because in their highly brittle financial world any lost turnover [ because you have supplemented the sales with free books at the publishers cost] is unwelcome.How is that a mantra , it's fact?

What is NOT fact is that the library sector is short of money . It IS short of management expertise to direct money into buying books instead of salaries for needless selection , which library suppliers would [ and do in some authorities]do for free .
So much so only about 8% of all library spending goes on buying books . [that incidentally is not mantra either ]. Tim Coates is actually one of the few who has argued for a re arrangement of the deck chairs to release about

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By Graeme Neill

Thanks for the comments. RDavies - Deloitte did not recognise retention of title on any of the stock. As reported here - http://www.thebookseller.com/news/75461-euk-releases-10m-worth-of-books.... - publishers were able to reclaim stock under an agreement with Deloitte.

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By Nigeio

Surely one look at the recurring headlines of this website offer an altruistic solution. Deloitte should make the books available at these deep fire sale prices to the library community. Get great retail stock into libraries without the retailer margin in a one-off exercise without damaging the high street retail supply chain. If one thing that prat Coates rambles on about is true is that getting good retail stock in without the wholesalers taking their cut is a worthwhile one-off exercise. And, before anyone asks, please don't tar me with anything to do with Coates as I think he's a blot on the industry landscape. But I can agree on one point (can't I?).

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By Commentator.

What world do you live in ?You are clearly a librarian , out of touch with the real world and terrified of the reality wake up call that Tim Coates is trying to bring into your self serving protectionist environment.
Your suggestion would damage the publishers, retailers and library suppliers...and in anycase you would need to spend more than the value of the "free" books in selection committee costs .

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By RDavies

So why is the retention of title not recognised on the 40%? What makes it different?

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By Nigeio

No, not a librarian but I do use libraries. I struggle to find good books in stock and the helpful staff (low paid it must be added) sympathise saying that there is little budget for new books. Why would it damage publishers pray tell? Why would it damage library suppliers? You roll out the mantra without obviously looking at the facts. A one off injection of stock like this is a no-brainer. Getting people back into libraries increases stock turn increasing revenue for authors improving etc etc Improving the market as a whole which - with reference to the article above - Deloitte are completely shafting. Nobody is a winner in the current set of circumstances (except Deloitte, their drone 'consultants' and the managers earning a good bonus). At least the infusion into libraries is a positive outcome from this mess. Oh, BTW Coates is still aEdited, you've made this point once already Nigeio, you don't need to repeat it. In general, we ask users to refrain from personal abuse. Thanks..

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By COMMENTATOR

Well NIGEO, where do I start ?
It is bad for publishers because this suggestion would rob them of turnover , because you would advocate substituting free books . Also of course money is still owed on these books in the first place , so you are generously giving away somebody elses goods .
It is bad for library suppliers because in their highly brittle financial world any lost turnover [ because you have supplemented the sales with free books at the publishers cost] is unwelcome.How is that a mantra , it's fact?

What is NOT fact is that the library sector is short of money . It IS short of management expertise to direct money into buying books instead of salaries for needless selection , which library suppliers would [ and do in some authorities]do for free .
So much so only about 8% of all library spending goes on buying books . [that incidentally is not mantra either ]. Tim Coates is actually one of the few who has argued for a re arrangement of the deck chairs to release about

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28
By Graeme Neill

Thanks for the comments. RDavies - Deloitte did not recognise retention of title on any of the stock. As reported here - http://www.thebookseller.com/news/75461-euk-releases-10m-worth-of-books.... - publishers were able to reclaim stock under an agreement with Deloitte.

Thu, 27/01/2011 - 13:28

Latest Jobs

eProduct Manager (Maternity Cover)
eProduct Manager (Maternity Cover)...
Available on request
International Sales Executive
We have an exciting opportunity to...
Available on request
Education Co-ordinator
Hachette Children’s Books, part...
Competitive
 

TheBookseller