[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: NEJM
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: NEJM
- From: "Rick Anderson" <rickand@unr.edu>
- Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 17:45:56 EDT
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
> Libraries "giving it [NEJM] away for free" does not necessarily equate to > less subscriptions for NEJM or any other journal. It doesn't necessarily in theory, but in practice it almost certainly does. An active life scientist without easy access to a librray copy of Nature would, I'd imagine, be more likely to shell out $70 for an individual subscription than one who does have such access. Again, the arithmetic is simple: If my institution has 11 Nature subscriptions on campus, 10 held by individual researchers and one held by the library, and the library cancels its subscription, the publisher breaks even if only one additional researcher subscribes on his own. If two or more subscribe on their own due to the library's cancellation, the publisher comes out ahead. (This becomes a less likely scenario as the journal gets more expensive, of course.) I'm not presenting this as a desirable arrangement. I'm just pointing out that a publisher acts rationally when it encourages individual subscriptions rather than shared subscriptions. It seems to me that this is self-evident, but then, this list is nothing if not a forum for the fierce denial of that which is self-evident. ------------- 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