I don't think it is usage-based pricing, but rather on-demand purchasing.
 Once an e-book is purchased through PDA, subsequent cost per use is either
non-existent or nugatory (if you count a tiny fraction of ongoing hosting
fees for e-book collections)
.
Fred W. Jenkins, Ph.D.
Professor and Associate Dean for Collections and Operations
University of Dayton Libraries
106A Roesch Library
300 College Park
Dayton, OH 45469-1360
(937) 229-4272




On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 7:16 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:35:29 -0600
>
> Is not PDA a form of "usage-based pricing" for books?  PDA services
> provide access to all (or almost all) of a publishers' books, and a
> usage metric determines when a purchase occurs. A budget for PDA
> provides a "cap" on how much money is to be spent in this way every
> year.  This contrasts with the "approval plan" model where all books
> fitting a certain category are purchased without regard to
> demonstrated actual need, much as a subscription provides access to
> all articles in a journal regardless of how many of them are actually
> ever used.  Are there significant differences I'm missing?
>
> Sandy Thatcher
>
>
> > From: "Armbruster, Chris" <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 04:42:02 -0800
> >
> > Some reflections on the meaning of usage-based pricing, how it could
> > work, what some benefits/risks might be and on why the libraries are
> > the key agent if it is to happen.
> >
> > 1. Usage-based pricing (or payment) would make scholarly publishing
> > more similar to trade publishing (i.e. number of purchases of any
> > title). Also, usage based-pricing could be seen as subscription
> > equivalent to article processing charges (making it interesting for
> > publishers who have SB and OA offerings, allowing for the development
> > of an integrated pricing model). Moreover, it would move scholarly
> > publishing closer to higher education publishing (i.e. course packs,
> > textbooks etc.), for which usage is key. In fact, HEI have lots of
> > experience with usage-based purchasing, not just digital, but also
> > historically, e.g. the university bookshop saw lots of 'usage-based'
> > purchasing when students queued up for the recommended literature.
> >
> > 2. It is often said that scholarly publishing is (so very) different,
> > but usage-based pricing does not preclude access to the whole body of
> > literature (in fact, it might make it easier, as contracts can be had
> > with all and any publishers, based on usage, with a cap imposed by the
> > library budget). Also, usage-based pricing does not need to be at the
> > dis/advantage of certain fields, because a field normalized (usage)
> > metric can be developed, which weighs usage according to the size of
> > the field (and usage habits) - akin to the weighing of citation
> > metrics. Indeed, it should be easy to commission researchers to
> > developed a such a field normalized usage metrics (and the libraries
> > should be doing the commissioning if a broad alliance is not
> > possible).
> >
> > 3. Libraries are probably the stakeholder that would benefit most
> > clearly from usage-based pricing because it can now offer scholars and
> > students access to all the literature (instead of selected bundles).
> > Also, it re-establishes libraries as serious partners in scholarly
> > communication (instead of as paymaster) because usage measurements
> > will facilitate innovation (e.g. within research fields, unused
> > journals will cease to exist and new ones emerge). Most publishers
> > will need to adapt to usage-based pricing, but some are doing it
> > already and all but the very largest ones (the top-two SB publishers
> > with their own platform) will probably benefit because it helps them
> > to restructure their portfolio. Even the two largest SB publishers
> > (who benefit from big deals) can probably adjust their business model,
> > and have the capacity to buy or add highly-used journals. There will
> > be losers, of course: societies and scholars (editors) that have been
> > able to hide low-usage journals in big deals. Also, intermediaries
> > that sell bundles will have adjustment costs.
> >
> > 4. I am amazed somewhat that libraries have not been able to sit down
> > together and develop a national or international usage-based pricing
> > model. Of all the actions that libraries might take to serve their
> > patrons and improve their position (finances, standing, influence) the
> > pursuit of usage-based pricing would seem the most rewarding and also
> > the easiest to achieve (compared, for example, to building and
> > populating thousands of repositories).
> >
> > Chris Armbruster
>