From: "Hamaker, Charles" <[log in to unmask]> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 04:17:20 +0000 Sandy Thatcher said: > I'm not sure why making money for your stockholders--which is > what commercial companies are supposed to do--should be > called "avaricious" behavior. If the price of gas went up reliably 10-15 percent a year, what would you call that Sandy? The price of medical care goes up around if I recall correctly 8-9% a year and its a national disaster. We are watching a train wreck in journal publishing, and Sandy thinks such behavior is just "making money for your stockholers"? It's classic behavior of an oligarchy. Monopolist level behavior. Complete disdain for your customers. And librarians have experience defining and calling attention tojust such behavior. We THOUGHT we had an answer, the whole industry did, and some major publishers thought the battle was over; have stated that the big deal in essence saved the industry and libraries. That the industry had accepted and learned to live with a 5% cap. Now we find major particpants in the pricing scheme have gone on an orgy of acquisitions and pricing. Justifying their behaviors with a range of rationales. Again. One publisher just this week, announced they had taken over 36 titles, to be added to their "new" base in addition to their annual cap. (if the library had a subscription). This is publicly diseminated information, I'm not breaching any NDA. So much for noting what your customers are experiencing right now. Now, in the midst of what many are calling a depression you use your primary customer contracts this way? Yeah, that's good karma for your stockholders. That'll increase stock holder value. Wait till I explain to the local administrative bodies what this means. Oh, it'll make sense, sure, just good ole capitalists increasing stocholder value. Publishers need called out, again, and we need to do that, publisher by publisher working around the NDAs. And yes, I believe we will see more libaries having to opt out of various schemes. I have a candidate publisher for posting details-diferent than the one mentioned above, but then there are so many to choose from-- name, public pricing scheme, most receent "offer", CPU, etc. and I plan on doing that later this week either here or with Against the Grain. Depends on how much time I can take from my day job. I hope others can do the same. If you have an outrageous offer or requirement on the table, lets hear about it. There are ways to publicize, and these publishers don't want publicity. Else why the NDA's they've tried to introduce all over the place. They are afraid of the light of sunshine. We need a strong disenfectant. Capitalism with controls Sandy. That's the lesson of the Banksters, and publicity is the control for avaricious behavior in publishing. Anyone remember Gordon and Breach? Trying to control information about avaricious behavior with NDA's is our own version of banksters. (some of those NDA's attempt to impose some of their conditions in perpetuity no less!) LOL Chuck Hamaker ________________________________________ From: LibLicense-L Discussion Forum [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of LIBLICENSE [[log in to unmask]] Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 9:11 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Future of the Subscription Model From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]> Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 21:25:01 -0600 I'm not sure why making money for your stockholders--which is what commercial companies are supposed to do--should be called "avaricious" behavior. These are not non-profit, mission-driven organizations; they are businesses out to make as much profit as the market will bear. Lowering prices would be rational for them to do only if they could gain greater market share by doing so and hence enhance overall revenues. Librarians need to stop thinking that commercial publishers are, like them, public servants; they do what they do to make more money for their investors, and they succeed or fail on that basis and that basis alone. If librarians want to change the game, they should stop giving in every time one of the commercial publishers offers a special discount, under the veil of an NDA, to induce continued subscription to a Big Deal. Commercial publishers know how to play this game well, and they seem to win out every time. Sandy Thatcher