[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Core Elsevier titles

We compared our statistics on the unsubscribed title report to the
statistics reported in our monthly transaction 'invoices,' and the figures
are way off. The reporting periods don't exactly coincide, but the
discrepancies are too large to be accounted for by overlapping periods.
Quite a few subscribed titles appear on the unsubscribed report,
presumably due to backfile downloads, but this too is somewhat suspect.
I've asked James Tonna for more information about known anomalies in the

RE: Academic Press, Harvard's IDEAL contract isn't through NERL, but I've
already spoken with Phil about this and have sent him some of our data.
I didn't mean to suggest that he was bound to analyze everything for us,
just that the new contract will include both so we need to include
Academic in our deliberations.  But Phil is great!


Peter Allison wrote:

> I'd like to thank Ross and especially Phil Davis for making this generous
> proposal. UConn will try to cooperate, I can say, however, that for UCONN
> at least, the two files "journals subscribed to" and "journals not
> subscribed to" do not have even a tangential relation to reality.
> When we first looked at "journals not subscribed to" we were ready to pull
> the plug on Science Direct, as activity was listed for a very small number
> of titles and the activity was almost nonexistent for most months.  It
> turned out that all our activity was represented on the other report. Are
> the rest of you getting more accurate reports? Peter