RE: Journal/Publisher 2010 price freeze info on MLA website

["David Prosser" <david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk>]

Joe articulates my fear in the current price round.  A number of 
small and society publishers have responded positively to ICOLC's 
call for price restraint, but it is not at all clear to me that 
we have market mechanisms that will reward those showing 
restraint.  My concern is that this could result in reduced 
revenues for those publishers that have shown themselves most 
responsive to the problems of library budgets.

David Prosser
Director, SPARC Europe

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Joseph Esposito
Sent: 04 August 2009 00:07
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: Journal/Publisher 2010 price freeze info on MLA website

I believe the point Nawin is making is that freezing or lowering
prices is not in a publisher's interest unless the product is of
marginal value, in which case a high price may indeed result in a
cancellation.  The obvious point to be made here is that this is
an editorial game (the best products win)and other aspects of a
publisher's trading practices (low pricing, good customer
service, flexible usage terms, nice people)are rarely rewarded
(except, to repeat, for marginal publications).  In fact, it may
be in the interests of a publisher of the higher quality
publications to raise prices even in desperate economic times, as
such a publisher is protected by the armor of outstanding
editorial content and can stand by and watch as the weaker
editorial products get cancelled, despite the generous trading
practices of those unfortunate publishers. If I have
misunderstood Nawin's question (which I took to be rhetorical),
please correct me.

I don't like the implications of this reasoning any more than
anyone else; it's a lot like cheering on the Second Law of
Thermodynammics; so I beg you not to shoot the messenger.  But
this is the way the economy works, and matters are not improved
by encouraging "good behavior" only to punish the most noble in
the end.

Joe Esposito

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Rais, Shirley (LLU)
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 6:08 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: Journal/Publisher 2010 price freeze info on MLA website

Nawin:

I would still base cuts primarily on usage and value to our collection &
mission, but if I had to make choices between marginal titles, those without
price increases would get an edge towards retention.  The price freezes will
help me save titles overall, not just the titles with frozen prices.  By
marginal I mean titles with usage on the low end of the spectrum that
support smaller programs on campus.  The price freezes may actually help me
add some titles!

Shirley Rais, MLS  -  Chair, Serials & Electronic Resources Dept.
Library Liaison to the School of Public Health LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY |
University Libraries Loma Linda, California 92350 srais@llu.edu


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu On Behalf Of Nawin Gupta
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 4:58 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: Journal/Publisher 2010 price freeze info on MLA website

It is gratifying to see that a number of publishers are foregoing price
increases for the upcoming year.  Anecdotal evidence to date is that many of
the libraries, if not most, are expecting budget cuts of around 10% or more.
Sadly, despite the noble gestures of some, chances are that librarians would
still need to cut some subscriptions.

If I may ask a question of librarians on this list:

Would a journal that did not increase its subscription price likely to be
spared in your decision to cut?  Or, are the decisions likely to be based
primarily on a journal's usage and its importance to the library "customers"
and collection?

Nawin Gupta
www.nawingupta.com