From:  [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 15:32:04 -0400

Dear Colleagues

By now you've probably heard about our Pay only for Usage (PofU) initiative,
which is causing quite a stir (if you haven't, see the background doc
attached). The speed and scale of response has shaken me: I've never seen
anything like it in over 30 years of dealing with libraries.

Conversations with librarians have resulted in the idea being tweaked: there
is now no upfront financial commitment from participating libraries; the
cap, above which you are not charged, regardless of the number of downloads,
is $5000; provisions are made for walk-ins, and for not making multiple
charges for content which is multiply used in a teaching context.

As far as I can see this idea is

- administratively simple: one invoice a year from us;
- eminently fair: you only pay for what your library patrons use;
- offers a way of cost-effectively meeting researchers specialist needs;
- pilots a move away from the concept of subscribing to journals, a concept
rendered less relevant through technology
- could become an important tool in confronting the 'scholarly
communications crisis'

If you would like to discuss how this idea can work for your library, or
have questions, or even join the band of 'early-adopters' - (award for being
first on board goes to University of North Carolina Greensboro) - don't
hesitate to contact me.

Best wishes
W Hughes
Director
Multi-Science Publishing

************
Over the years, as a publisher, I've heard librarians complain quite a
lot about the prevalent subscription based model. They don't like it
because journals are too expensive, and because of the ongoing
commitment; they don't like publisher bundles because although
attractively priced, usually unwanted/unneeded content is included
which still has to be paid for. The costs and constraints are annoying
in themselves and also soak up budget which libraries would like to
use for improving the services and resources they can offer to their
patrons.

So, having thought about it, I've come up with a possible solution,
encapsulated by the counter-intuitive (for a publisher) heading, Don't
Subscribe.

Don't subscribe to our specialist peer-reviewed content that might
enrich the offering your library can make in engineering and applied
science.

Instead, adopt our Pay only for Usage model.

Very simply, this is how it works. Our content and its backfile is
made available in your library. If downloads are made, we charge $5
per download. If there's no usage, then no payment - you've got
nothing to lose. If there's usage, then you're meeting specialist
needs without the burden of a subscription. And the download costs are
capped so you don't face unlimited liability. Even if the value of
downloads reaches the cap value (usually $5000) you can still make
more downloads at no extra cost. What could be simpler, or more fair?

Please contact me for more details.

best wishes
W Hughes
Director
Multi-Science Publishing Co Ltd

ps - see what could be available in your library with no outlay from you:
http://multi-science.metapress.com

- see editorial information about us and our journals here -
www.multi-science.co.uk