Lisa Richmond did a very good job in this
article, especially her explanation of how inelastic demand allows commercial
publishers to exploit their monopoly positions.
There is one comment I believe is
incorrect: “[Bundling] increases the subscription rate of the
less-desirable titles, which often carry higher profit margins.” My
understanding is that low-circulation titles usually bring in smaller profits,
and that some publishers even keep a few on board that lose a little money. Also,
the way bundles are contracted, it’s hard to say just what rates are for
any individual title.
But this quibble about less-desirable
titles doesn’t undermine the author’s thesis that bundles increase publishers’
monopoly power. As Hugh points out, it’s not a new idea, but I agree that
Richmond’s article is a valuable critique of the “Big Deal.”
Steve Black
Reference, Serials, and Instruction
Librarian
Neil Hellman Library
The
(518) 458-5494
From:
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 11:28
AM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: [SERIALST] Commercial
domination of academic e-journals
The June issue of “Z Magazine” includes an
article entitled “The Dark Side of Online Journals.” It is written
by an academic librarian & cites a number of scholarly articles. The
article is also available on the magazine’s website as free content (http://www.zmag.org/zmag/viewArticle/21606.)
The story may be old hat to many of you, but it is valuable to see the research
tied together by a provocative theory.
Hugh
M. Crane
Assistant
Head of Reference