RE: “What does the the number of students have to do with production cost?”

Server load is what immediately popped to mind. More people accessing a database at a given time means more load on the servers. So a company has to have enough computer power to ensure that their servers don’t run slowly or crash entirely, which means high quality and quantity of the servers themselves, plus local and remote backups. And then there’s the air conditioning needed to keep those servers cool, and the electricity to power it all. Since bigger schools have the potential to use a bigger proportion of the vendor’s computing resources, it does make a certain amount of sense to spread the cost out in a tiered system.

I’m not saying that what they charge isn’t exorbitant. Just that we need to remember that we’re supporting other costs than just journal production.

skd

S. Kirsten Davis

Electronic Resources and Serials Librarian

University of Central Oklahoma

t: 405.974.2901

f: 405.974.3874

library.uco.edu

From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum [mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Sarah D. Tusa
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 2:58 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