[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Future of the "subscription model?"
- To: "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: Future of the "subscription model?"
- From: "Armbruster, Chris" <Chris.Armbruster@EUI.eu>
- Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 21:42:15 EDT
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
Ok. Are you saying that the 300k are being redirected to pay APCs - or are they just being cut? Chris ________________________________________ From: email@example.com [firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Rick Anderson [email@example.com] Sent: 02 November 2011 02:14 To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: Future of the "subscription model?" >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