[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: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 11:40:03 EDT
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
> Rick, your arithmetic only works if the cost of the personal and library > subscription are the same, and if the cost of the personal subscription > were sufficient to actually pay for more than the true costs. If, as is > more likely to be the case, the library price in your example were $700, > the publisher would have to sell 10 more to make the same revenue, and > would also have to pay for producing 10 more copies. This is true, of course, for those journals which charge institutions more than they charge individuals for print subscriptions (some do, many don't). And my model also doesn't take into account the higher price of institutional online access; it's based specifically on a print scenario. > Why the publisher > does need the personal subscriptions, as I thought we all knew, is the > associated advertising revenue. Well, right, and that goes to my basic premise: there's nothing irrational about a publisher encouraging individual subscriptions at the expense of institutional ones. Saying to publishers, "Hey, my library will cancel its subscription if you don't do business the way I want you to" will not necessarily make most journal publishers quake in their boots -- especially if what they publish is a highly-regarded, widely-read journal to which individuals may subscribe at a reasonable price. Where such is not the case, the impact of losing a library subscription may be greater, of course. ------------- 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