RE: Price discrimination for academic subscriptions (discussion)

["David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>]

So it did, and it set its rates at unaffordable level for academic
institutions. It is thus not a significant component of use in most
academic institutions except where it provides the only access. (I
remember being quoted $24,000 for a site license to a single Philadelphia
newspaper.)  Its competitors, who set pricing at reasonable levels, such
as Silver Platter and Ovid, have done very well.  Perhaps the problem is
with the level of pricing more than with the details of how it is paid.

Dr. David Goodman
Associate Professor, 
Palmer School of Library and Information Science
Long Island University, Brookville, NY 
dgoodman@liu.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Kramer [mailto:SKramer@fielding.edu] 
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 7:46 AM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: Price discrimination for academic subscriptions
(discussion)

If I remember correctly, did DIALOG not -- at the requests of many
librarians, who preferred a *predictable* fee structure over what might be
deemed a more "fair" one for budgeting needs -- begin flat-free charging
instead of or as an alternative to (only) per-search, per-view,
per-minute, etc. charging about ten or twelve years ago?  The budgetary
unpredictability and administrative overhead may make a "by-the-drink
pricing model" unappealing to libraries (I does to me).

Now, if e-journal and aggregator database providers and academic libraries
could at least agree on consistent pricing tiers based on student FTEs, as
long as that model is used ... for one product, the price goes up at 1500
FTE, for another, at 2000 FTE ...

--
 Stefan Kramer
 SKramer@fielding.edu