LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 21 Dec 2011 21:39:35 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
From: "Hutchinson, Alvin" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 08:18:35 -0500

I think the response that Charles got from faculty at his institution
leaves little doubt that with the academic journal business
(admittedly a sub-set of the publishing industry as a whole) there are
two audiences served: readers AND authors.

Hence the experiments with the author-pays model in this niche of publishing.

I know there have been some debates on this thread about what a
publisher does and who a publisher serves but clearly in this segment
of the industry, authors are receiving a service.

They're just not paying for it yet--at least not directly.

Alvin Hutchinson
Smithsonian Institution Libraries


-----Original Message-----
Subject: Re: Future of the subscription model
From: "Hamaker, Charles" <[log in to unmask]>
 Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 07:41:37 +0000

"I do believe we now should be moving to "by the drink" options when
that's the best option. I have an example where we are moving 75% of a
publisher's cost basis to "on demand"  And although I explained to
faculty that we were just trying to be more cost effective, the first
and immediate response I got was "but I publish in that journal!""

ATOM RSS1 RSS2