[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: NEJM
- To: "'liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu'" <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: NEJM
- From: Paul Burry <paul.burry@techbc.ca>
- Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 15:40:39 EDT
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Now this one's a real money saver for libraries. . . cancel all those expensive contracts with Ebsco, Proquest etc., and just tell patrons they should subscribe individually to the electronic journals of their choice!! Do we want to start down this road?? If publishers want to "act rationally and maximize revenue" let's go this route and see if they can match the revenues they get now from libraries!! Paul Burry Information Services Support Specialist Information Resources & Digital Library Technical University of British Columbia paul.burry@techbc.ca p: 604-586-6019 f: 604-586-6025 -----Original Message----- From: Rick Anderson [mailto:rickand@unr.edu] Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 11:08 AM To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: RE: NEJM > I'm beginning to wonder if patrons frustrated by the lack of access will > obtain personal subscriptions on their own. Libraries essentially have > their hands tied in this situation and can't be blamed for not providing > network access. Individual subscriptions with password access would allow > patrons to get the information at the same time increasing the number of > subscriptions and revenue. Any thoughts on this? I think the scenario you describe is the one preferred by all journal publishers. If you published a journal, wouldn't you much rather have 1,000 subscriptions than one? In this as in all other matters, we can expect the publisher to try to act rationally and maximize its revenues. (Yes, NEJM is a non-profit, but even non-profits try to bring in as much money as they reasonably can in order to support their programs.) It's not that simple, of course. Institutions pay more for campus-wide online access than they do for a single paper subscription, which makes sense. So the question is whether NEJM would have made more money by offering site-wide access than it will by making that access unavailable and forcing those who want online access to purchase it themselves. If 50 people from the campus community choose to buy their own access, and the site license would have cost less than 50x a single subscription, NEJM wins. Otherwise, it loses. ------------- Rick Anderson Director of Resource Acquisition The University Libraries University of Nevada, Reno "Beware the cynic as well as 1664 No. Virginia St. the huckster." Reno, NV 89557 -- Ted Marchese PH (775) 784-6500 x273 FX (775) 784-1328 rickand@unr.edu