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:
Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:19:35 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (64 lines)
From: David Shumaker <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 10:52:18 -0400

Sharon—

It’s a fair question. Here’s a response, representing my opinion and
only my opinion.

We should pay for value.

However, it’s hard to pin down value, so we have to use some rough substitutes.

Location is a terrible substitute for value. Maybe there was some
justification for it in 1985. Since the rise of the ubiquitous
Internet, not so much.

Institutional headcount  is a poor substitute for value. For example,
suppose two law firms each have 1000 attorneys. One has 200 in its tax
practice; the other 20. Will the second pay the same for tax law
materials as the first, because the institutional headcount is the
same? I think not.

The next options that come to mind have to do with making realistic
estimates of the number of “seats” needed, i.e. people who are likely
to use the resource, and/or the amount of use; setting a fair initial
price; and recalibrating periodically based on actual use and changes
in the number of actual or potential users (e.g. number of tax lawyers
in the example above). Note that the seats are not assigned, the
seatholders are not named, and this is not direct pay for use:
estimates are used to help set a flat price for a specified term. Long
term licenses can provide for review and adjustment of the price
periodically within the term of the license.  I believe many licenses
are structured along these lines.


--Dave



From: Sharon Landers <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 07:59:00 -0500

As a small publisher, we struggle with how to set our prices. We
currently use a tier-based pricing model, and we do consider the
number of geographical sites. We realize that, for quite a lot of our
academic and medical library subscribers, "single site" no longer
applies. This discussion has been interesting to us, and we would like
to pose a question to the list:

What pricing model would most librarians prefer?

Feel free to email me off-list.

Thank you in advance for your replies. I look forward to reading them.

----------------------------------------
Sharon Landers
Director of Circulation
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
PO Box 752870
Memphis TN 38175-2870
Email: [log in to unmask]
www.psychiatrist.com

ATOM RSS1 RSS2