[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Future of the "subscription model?"
- To: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: Future of the "subscription model?"
- From: Rick Anderson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 19:09:29 EST
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
>If publishers detect a pattern in which subscriptions are >cancelled and single-article sales are substituted for them, >then the price of single articles will rise. Well, exactly. I fully expect publishers to do whatever they can to continue realizing constantly-increasing revenues from their library customers. It's only reasonable that they should do so, especially given that they've been able to secure increasing revenues every year for the past few decades. The problem is that they're going to fail, because throughout those past decades, the curves of library budgets (which have tended to increase annually at low-single-digit rates) and journal prices (which have tended to increase at rates of 9-10% per year) have been headed for an inevitable and permanent divergence. Libraries have been warning publishers about this since as long ago as the 1970s; the standard response has been "Yeah, you keep saying there's a pricing crisis, but then you renew all your subscriptions." Now the divergence has come. Most of us can no longer redirect money from other budget areas to cover extortionate subscription price increases, so now we're cancelling, and some of us are doing so in great chunks. Publishers (in the aggregate) aren't going to be able to continue realizing annually-increasing revenues from libraries anymore for the same reason that you can't realize blood from a rock. Charging more for articles isn't going to help publishers at all, because the money they want simply isn't there to be had. --- Rick Anderson Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections J. Willard Marriott Library University of Utah email@example.com