[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Future of the "subscription model?"
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Future of the "subscription model?"
- From: Ann Okerson <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 21:39:32 EDT
- Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Sender: email@example.com
Rick, when your library cancels the $300,000 worth of subscriptions, I'm guessing that most of that will go back into subscription like-services (paying for the price increases of the subs you do keep, paying for new e-resources - most of which will have some kind of subscription-like component, even if not for actual journals). Would that be a fair guess? If it is, then the subscription model isn't exactly eroding? Cheers, Ann Okerson On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Rick Anderson <firstname.lastname@example.org>wrote: >>To date, the subscription model seems alive and well and still >>in the best interest of many publishers, societies and >>libraries. We are still waiting for evidence that libraries >>(and their institutions) are willing to substantially reduce >>and/or forego the subscription-based model. > > Here's a little bit of evidence, for what it's worth: my > library is preparing to cut $300,000 (roughly 10% of the > serials budget) from its roster of subscriptions in the coming > fiscal year, and in all likelihood to abandon the Elsevier Big > Deal as well. This obviously doesn't amount to a wholesale > abandonment of the subscription model, but that's not because > we have any lingering affection for the model -- it's because > the quick extortion of punitive per-article pricing is > currently the only alternative to the slower, more gentle > extortion of subscription price increases. > > --- > Rick Anderson > Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections > J. Willard Marriott Library > University of Utah > email@example.com