[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: News Release: Project Transfer:price rises

Regarding tranfer and prices, here is an interesting example of how prices can change on transfer.

As of 2007 the journal, Earthquake engineering and engineering vibration
(ISSN: 1671-3664 (print version) ISSN: 1993-503X (electronic version))

passed from its previous publishing body, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, at a list price in 2005 of US$80, according to Ulrich's, over to Springer. The journal will now cost the library over ?650.

While the journal is now published quarterly rather than semi-annually as before, this is still quite a rise.

Mary Joan Crowley
Biblioteca Ingegneria Strutturale e Geotecnica
Via Eudossiana, 18
00184 Roma. Italy.
Phone: 0644585387

----- Original Message -----
From: "Neil Renison" <neil.renison@jcu.edu.au>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 11:45 PM
Subject: Re: News Release: Project Transfer

An assumption here is that The Code of Transfer is going to make a significant difference to the frequency of transfers. Unlikely and perhaps unprovable. An increase in transfers alone won't be sufficient proof.

There is nothing new about journals changing publisher and the drivers for accelerated change are already out there. What the code can do is eliminate or reduce the worst effects of change of publisher on access to the literature in a online environment. There is a good chance that the UKSG Working Group's efforts will achieve just that.

Neil Renison - Librarian (Acquisitions Services)
Information Resources
James Cook University
Townsville QLD 4811 Australia.
Email: Neil.Renison@jcu.edu.au
Phone: (07) 4781 5073 Fax: (07) 4781 5886

Joseph J. Esposito wrote:

Of course.  But if a price increase were the solution to sustainability,
then a journal could have raised prices without a transfer.

The Code of Transfer is not a demon, nor is it an angel.  It is, like the
internal combustion engine, a fascinating innovation whose full
implications may not be understood for some time.  If I were representing
a large publisher, I would say, Go for it! If I were representing a small
publisher, I would say, Uh, oh! If I were an author, I would say, Who
cares? And if I were a librarian, I would ask, Why is it that just about
every innovation (your list here) that is developed to help me winds up
deepening my budgetary mess and somehow or other lines the pockets of the
large commercial publishers?

Joe Esposito