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]


-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>

I would also be interested to learn from libraries. Most of us know
that libraries do not have sufficient funding to keep up with the
costs of the increased level of publication. At the moment this is
mainly the cost of subscriptions. They really do want to save on
costs.

How much print do they retain? I cannot find a revenue from print line
in the AAP survey since the 2010 one which showed a surprisingly high
percentage but if Paula Gantz sees this she can tell us what the
picture is now. Looking at revenue from the publisher end as in these
surveys might give a better take that library based surveys breaking
out print.

We also know that most scholars in most fields hardly ever visit the
library and when they do it is not to look for journal articles which
they access on their lists. Even if libraries do not have to pay extra
for print they still have the extra handling and space problems that
print brings with it. As Cliff Lynch pointed out a few years ago for
the great majority of publications there is no danger of the digital
version disappearing though there are problems still over securing
continued access - though this is surely receding. There are a lot of
assertions here but I can provide evidence (surveys) if needed.

I know that humanities are different but in terms of costs and numbers
of journals they represent a small part of the whole.

Anthony

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Cohen <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 08:37:16 -0400

Sally,

One can surmise theories.  Listserve recipients would know how
accurate these are.   Some university "libraries of record" in the USA
still collect the print because of...

1) institutional inertia?

2) pressure from older faculty members?

3) "specialized collection" status? (i.e., smaller special collections
for Schools of Public Health, Social Work, Anthropology, etc.) where
the number of core journals needed by the faculty could be limited.

4) existing ownership of relatively long runs of print journals?

5) sufficient funding/budgeting for print journal ownership and maintenance?

6) fear of "loss of content" because of server problems from online
journals, coupled with lack of practical knowledge about whether
disparate journals/journal packages utilize backup services?

These are a few that come to mind.

Bill