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]