But of course, even some of the print titles have “Tier Pricing”
and for most there is at least the difference between and individual and
institutional price. What they are looking at, of course, is lost revenues
because people will read something in the library rather than purchasing an
individual subscription. In a population of 25,000 they will lose more
customers than in a population of 1,000.
Judith A. Koveleskie, MLIS, MA
Periodicals Librarian
Seton Hill University
Reeves Memorial Library
1 Seton Hill Drive
Greensburg, PA 15601-1548
724-838-7828
This
document may contain confidential information and is intended solely for the use
of the addressee. If you received it in error, please contact the sender at
once and destroy the document. The document may contain information subject to
restrictions of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy and the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Acts. Such information may not be disclosed or used in any
fashion outside the scope of the service for which you are receiving the
information.
From: SERIALST: Serials
in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Sarah
D. Tusa
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 3:58 PM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Just a thought . . .
I respectfully disagree. I don’t see how it costs any more
to give access to a campus of 25,000 than it does to a campus of 1,000
students. What does the number of students have to do with
production cost?
And when the same journals were strictly available in print, and
anyone could walk into the library (we don’t restrict entry until midnight),
the number of students and/or faculty who used the same journal and even the
same article did not seem to make a difference in the price. We all
paid the same price then. The potential usage doesn’t escalate that
exponentially just because the same journal is online. The usage just
shifts from walk-in usage of the print to authorized log-in
access to THE SAME TYPE OF CONTENT FROM THE SAME SOURCES. The same
small segment of the campus population is going to use the same
subject-specific titles that they always did. Yes, they may use it a tad
more because it is more convenient, but the usage doesn’t grow enough to
justify setting the price based on campus population or on “potential
users”. Furthermore, The value of the information doesn’t
change with the number of users. It’s the same kind of content that used
to have a fixed price when it was in print. The nature (and thus the
value) of the content hasn’t changed. The contributors get no direct
remuneration from the publishers. (The integrity of the content would be
compromised if the authors were paid, and it would definitely sully the field
if peer reviewers were paid, so that leaves whatever production cost is
actually incurred to host the content and make it available. If the
cost of production has increased, then I can understand a moderate, overall
price increase. However, I will never agree that the value of the content
has any logical connection with the “potential” or actual
number of downloads on any given campus.
Sarah Tusa, Associate Professor
Coordinator of Collection Development & Acquisitions
Mary & John Gray Library, Lamar University
PO Box 10021
Beaumont, TX 77710-0021
Ph: 409/880-8125
Fax: 409/880-8225
From: SERIALST: Serials
in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Rick
Anderson
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 1:55 PM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Just a thought . . .
>
Shoot. There’s nothing “potentially infinite” about our campus
> population or even the number of “potential users.”
“Unlimited” would be a better word than “infinite,” I guess. What’s
functionally unlimited is not the number of users, but the amount of use that a
given population of users can make of a content service when no download limit
is imposed. When you sell a loaf of bread, what you’re providing in
exchange for the purchase price is a single loaf of bread. When it’s
gone, it’s gone, and if the customer wants more he has to buy another loaf.
When you sell site-based access to an online service, you’re providing a
functionally unlimited number of downloads. In that circumstance there’s
nothing irrational about pegging the access price, in some degree, to the
number of people being served. (How high or low the price itself should
be is a separate question, of course.)
Now granted, it doesn’t cost a publisher twice as much to provide two downloads
as it does to provide one download. But it does cost significantly more
to give access to a campus of 25,000 students than it does to give access to a
campus of 1,000 students.
Just to be extra clear: I’m not defending any particular publisher’s pricing
practice. Just pointing out that it makes no sense to compare selling a
loaf of bread to providing an ongoing service like an e-journal.
--
Rick Anderson
Assoc. Dir. for Scholarly Resources & Collections
Marriott Library
Univ. of Utah
rick.anderson@utah.edu
(801) 721-1687