RE: Nature Journals: User Name and Password (Super ID Access)

["Michael Spinella" <mspinell@aaas.org>]

No thanks, Chuck. Our prices are about right, and we're very pleased with
the uptake Science Online has received among institutions. And which
policies were you asking us to reconsider?

Science Online is already one of the most widely used scientific journal
websites in the world. We make many of the services available for free
(even some full-text articles, but not most)... and we have several
'gateway' arrangements with other scientific portals...and we are one of
the charter members of Crossref...precisely because we want it to be a
very accessible website. Again, I suggest you get ahold of our BPA
statements about site usage.

We do work with consortia and sometimes with individual institutions to
offer discounts. These are best when a consortium can bring in a number of
smaller institutions. You and I haven't talked about that, but I'm willing
if you are interested. In fact, we're already working with the terrific
folks at TRLN, and I'd love to see more North Carolina institutions join
in with them.

Mike

_______________

>>> "Hamaker, Chuck" <cahamake@email.uncc.edu> 09/27/00 10:37AM >>>

Ok sure I can purchase sitewide access, for a mere additonal (in my
institution's case) about $4,500.

If you don't want to be tarred the inaccessible brush, you'd best rethink
your policies (and pricing).


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Spinella [mailto:mspinell@aaas.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 10:17 AM
To: Hamaker, Chuck; liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu 
Subject: RE: Nature Journals: User Name and Password (Super ID Access)


Chuck,

Why are you tarring Science with the same brush as Nature? Science IS out
there with a full service site-wide institutional subscription, and our
editors are putting a lot of time and effort into making it a truly
dynamic product, not just an online 'copy' of the print. I think a
minimally honest discussion here would at least acknowledge that Science
is trying to serve institutions' needs and that we are out there taking
the risks, however small you think they are, of providing the added
benefits of online publishing to our readers. Geez!

We're not worried about losing *readers* by publishing online. Science's
website is hugely popular. Take a look at our BPA audits of the site
usage. As far as I know, we are the only scientific website being audited
by the same bureau that audits our print circulation (or any other
independent bureau). And we're really proud of the usage the site is
receiving.  It's the subscription base that concerns us. If anything,
Science has even more readers today than it did before going online - and
it was already the most widely read print scientific publication in the
world.

But there is a difference - an important difference - between readers and
those subscribers who pay to enable the journal to be published. From
where you sit, it may seem quite simple and obvious how to manage this
transitional period, but to anyone who understands publishing economics
and has some responsibility for the financial stability of a journal, the
current situation is simultaneously thrilling and worrisome. Only someone
who didn't really care about these journals - or simply didn't understand
their economics - would be cavalier about it.

Mike Spinella
Science