From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 12:26:09 +0100

Ann:  I do not know whether publishers on the list will agree but as an
ex-publisher I am a little surprised by your point (1) - but horrified by
points (2) through (5). It amazes me that there are still publishers who do
not have proper online arrangements in the way you describe. May I ask a
question? Are these all smaller learned societies who self-publish?  I am
referring to (2) through (5)

Anthony

-----Original Message-----
From: "Prestamo, Anne" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 21:42:05 +0000

We continue to get ~800 titles in print, and about 1/3 of those are
print+online subscriptions.  We would very much prefer to be entirely
e-only, but are frustrated by publishers that do not offer acceptable
options.  Some examples that cause us to keep print:

1)  Institutional e-only subscription is many times the cost of a print
institutional subscription.

2)  Publisher's version of "electronic" is unacceptable.  For example, they
email you a PDF of each issue.  Sorry, just don't want to go there.

3)  No IP authentication.

4)  There is no online version offered.

5)  No post-cancellation rights for e-only.  If the cost of a
print+online sub is equal to, or no more than 10% higher, we get both.
If higher than 10% to add the online access we get print only.   When
we get both we no longer shelve nor bind the print issues.   They are
held in a processing area until we have a complete volume, boxed,
and sent to storage.


Anne Prestamo
Claud D. Kniffin Professor of Library Service and Education
Associate Dean for Collection and Technology Services
Oklahoma State University Libraries
Email: [log in to unmask]