Re: Price discrimination for academic subscriptions (discussion)

[J.F.Rowland@lboro.ac.uk]

One cause of high price increases when there is no malevolent intent is
what, for want of a better word, one might call accountants' pessimism.  
I agree with Anthony about the complex internal negotiations that go on.  
When I worked for a learned society publisher (one that published directly
itself, not through a commercial publisher) the publishing staff would
budget for the likely costs and circulations in the forthcoming year and
suggest prices.  Then the chief accountant would say, "Ah, but the
inflation rate could well be worse than that!" or "The dollar exchange
rate could go against us!" or "Short-term interst rates might go up (or
down)" and would persuade senior management to take the most prudent (i.e.
most pessimistic) view on these matters.  Hence the price increases
imposed were higher than the publications people had proposed, and when in
the event the inflation rate or the exchange rate did not go as badly
against us as in the accountant's worst-case scenario, we hauled in
another big "surplus".  (Not-for-profit organisations don't make profits.)

Fytton Rowland, Loughborough University.

***

Quoting Anthony Watkinson <anthony.watkinson@btopenworld.com>:

> What David says is very fair. Let me rephrase. SPARC and others write
> that the market is dysfunctional and that part of the dysfunctionality 
> is that, as end-users do not have to pay and demand that a title is 
> subscribed to, publishers can stick up prices as much as they wish 
> because libraries have to buy. It is my impression that most publishers 
> do not decide now to take advantage of this dysfunctionality. They fear 
> being noticed by lists like this one, which is all to the good.. This is 
> not new. When I worked for the Thomson Corporation for eleven years from 
> 1988 and for most of that time (not the last few years) was responsible 
> for pricing Chapman & Hall journals the corporate hierarchy was very 
> worried about raising prices more than the competition. The Thomson view 
> was that retention of subscribers was the main aim and the best policy. 
> I should add that it is my experience that pricing decisions are very 
> complicated ones with a lot of internal discussion and argument. 
> Remember also that some commercial publishers have to argue the case for 
> price increases with learned societies or even with editors who are on 
> royalty arrangements. It is not always the publishers who want to make 
> the biggest increase. I think that David's students are very lucky as 
> long as he notes whether or not there are more pages or issues being 
> offered.