11.1 FROM THE EDITOR, Marcia Tuttle
11.2 AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY, AD HOC LIBRARY
COMMITTEE,
James Rovnyak
11.3 ELSEVIER RESPONSE TO ARL SERIALS PRICES REPORT,
AND ARL'S
REPLY, Letters from Karen Hunter and Duane Webster
11.4 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY PRICING, Peter S.
Graham
11.5 SETTING UP A MAIL FORWARDING GROUP ON BITNET,
Mary McLaren
11.6 HAMAKER'S HAYMAKERS, Chuck Hamaker
11.7 DOWNLOADING THE NEWSLETTER FROM A VAX TO A
PC, Kerry Kresse
Following up on suggestions made at ALA, we have in this issue two sets of instructions for handling your newsletter after you receive it on BITNET. Mary McLaren forwards her copy to other persons on campus, and Kerry Kresse downloads hers to her pc through the mainframe on her campus. Those of you who are e-mail experts, feel free to skip over these instructions, but some of us still need help!
Barbara von Wahlde sent a copy of a paper given at IFLA by Rolf Griebel and Ulrich Montag, "The International Problem of Differential Pricing for Research Libraries." The men discuss the results, as of mid-May 1989, of their English-language questionnaire distributed to 500 libraries in 78 countries, in April. French and Spanish versions were to be sent out last summer. This preliminary report covers both monographs and periodicals, and both individual/institutional and geographical pricing differentials. Libraries varied in their response to differential pricing, including the degree of difference they will accept without protest and the actions they take to obtain materials at a lower price. This "internal use only" paper is, even based on partial results, full of information and guidance for libraries to use in dealing with this issue. The investigators advocate such strategies as "buying around" and exchanges with libraries in country of origin of affected titles, but their strongest recommendation is for librarians to "unite effectively at national and international levels to present their matters of concern," continuing and broadening the dialog with scientific journal publishers. In closing, they state, "It has been the aim of this project of the IFLA Section of Acquisition and Exchange to initiate this unification among the world's librarians." The final report, planned for 1990, "should become the basis for negotiations of IFLA with publishers and their associations.
11.2 AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY, AD HOC LIBRARY
COMMITTEE
James Rovnyak, Dept of Mathematics, Mathematics-Astronomy Bldg,
Univ of Virginia, Charlottesville VA 22903; BITNET:
JLR5M@VIRGINIA.
The American Mathematical Society recently named an Ad Hoc Library Committee to study library issues that affect the mathematics research community. The committee consists of four mathematicians (Richard A. Askey, Robert S. Doran, James Rovnyak - Chair, George Seligman) and four librarians (Nancy D. Anderson, Dorothy McGarry, Mary Ann Southern, John W. Weigel II).
The objective of the committee is to assemble information which will assist the mathematics community and librarians to build and maintain quality mathematics libraries into the future. Of primary concern are issues that involve the viability or effectiveness of the mathematics library as a research tool. Major areas of focus are (1) basic facts about mathematics libraries, (2) cost issues, (3) the information-seeking habits of mathematicians, and (4) new technologies. The committee will be pleased to receive comment from any concerned groups or individuals.
11.3 ELSEVIER RESPONSE TO ARL SERIALS PRICES REPORT,
AND ARL'S REPLY
Karen Hunter, Vice President and Assistant to the Chairman, Elsevier Science Publishers,
and Duane Webster, Executive Director, Association of Research Libraries, letters reprinted
by permission.
Early in August directors of ARL member libraries received a memo from Karen Hunter, Vice President and Assistant to the Chairman, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. It reads as follows:
As you would expect, the recent ARL report on serials pricing -- and the heated discussion of it at ALA -- are of concern to Elsevier management. As my attached letter to Duane Webster tries to explain, the report draws false conclusions based upon misleading and incomplete information. This only exacerbates an already difficult situation and potentially polarizes parties who should be working together. In that respect, if ARL was seeking a fair and accurate assessment of the present situation, it has not been well-served by its consultants.
I invite any of you who would like to discuss either the report or other serials issues -- present or future -- with responsive and responsible publishers to contact me....
The letter:
July 21, 1989
Mr. Duane E. Webster
Executive Director
Association of Research Libraries
1527 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
Dear Mr. Webster:
Thank you for sending me a copy of the REPORT OF THE ARL SERIALS PRICES PROJECT. Having now had the opportunity to study it, I would like to make certain observations.
We understand that you undertook a serious effort to obtain better insight into actual publishing costs, compared with the steady rise in subscription rates over the last decade. This letter is not the most appropriate forum to analyze or refute in detail the specific figures in the study. Nor can we do so without the underlying data; indeed, we do not even know the Elsevier titles involved. However, we consider it useful to highlight some of the flaws in both the methodology and conclusions of the Economic Consulting Services (ECS) study.
1. Costs
ECS looks at five cost categories: (1) "editing labor" (which seems to be limited to academic editors' fees); (2) typesetting; (3) printing labor; (4) paper; and (5) postage. There are many major cost categories omitted, including: copyediting, subscription fulfillment, marketing (including international promotion and sales), financial and administrative overhead, research and development, and international editorial management. These costs far exceed the 5% allocated to "Other" and are critical parts of the journal publishing process.
2. Cost increases
Cost increases result not only from inflation or, as with paper, cyclical commodity shortages. There are other dynamics at work, particularly during the period 1973-87, when the speed and intensity of research and the communication of research results were impacted by computers. This was a period where many improvements in service were required to remain competitive, such as the use of international air delivery and the automation of editorial offices. These service improvements cost money over and above any inflationary increases.
There are other structural cost changes unrelated to inflation. For example, over the past decade there has been a severe decline in the subsidies provided by universities toward the maintenance of editorial offices. Publishers must make up the difference. In addition, as the volume of manuscripts being submitted increases and is increasingly international, publishers must invest in improved quality control on a worldwide basis. These permanent changes in the way business is conducted create cost increases in excess of inflation.
3. Journal types
In order to have a meaningful analysis, the components of the analysis should be consistent. If one is talking about "journals," then the reference is to collections of refereed primary articles. If the measure for Elsevier is the cost structure of the Netherlands, then the titles measured should have their principal costs incurred in the Netherlands.
As indicated above, we have not been given the opportunity to review which Elsevier titles were included in the study. However, four Elsevier titles are mentioned in Appendix C. It is significant that two are sections of the Excerpta Medica secondary (abstract) service and two are professional (non-academic-library) newsletters. Further, the Excerpta Medica titles are produced in Ireland, one newsletter in the U.S. and the other in the U.K.
These four publications clearly have no relationship to the prices or costs of primary journals in the Netherlands and it raises questions about the validity of the whole list. There is no evidence that these place and type distinctions were considered by ECS.
4. Exchange Rates
It is not clear how ECS handled the effects of currency fluctuations. The impression is given that by taking a period of increase and decrease, the effect of the rate fluctuations is neutralized. Without better information of what ECS actually did, it is difficult to do more than register non-specific objection. We are not persuaded by the text as presented -- and by the facts as we have experienced them -- that the effect is as neutral over the long term as ECS would have one believe.
As to the issue of establishing one worldwide price in local currency, the ECS inference that this is not in the libraries' interest is totally unfounded. This is the fairest long-term approach. The alternative would be to have a "home" and "foreign" rate -- the dual pricing practice so regularly criticized by libraries.
5. Circulation levels
Of greatest concern, ECS barely touches the issue of circulation levels. Virtually every publisher of scientific research journals -- whether society or commercial -- has experienced a steady decline in the subscription levels of its major journals over the past 15 or more years. As the pressure to publish an ever increasing number of articles has lead to larger journals (more pages) and to the formation of new journals, the market has been faced with far more material than it can purchase. The result is the well-documented process of cancellation and of only purchasing very selected new titles. The remaining subscriptions must bear an increased portion of the journal's cost.
In summary, ECS made certain limited assumptions about costs and the factors affecting cost increases. Based upon those assumptions, it created a model, observed certain results and jumped to a characterization of those results as proof of a hypothesis. In Elsevier's case, ECS found a 3.0% annual gap from 1973-87 between price and inflation-related cost increases.
We cannot verify the accuracy of this figure, given the absence of data and the complexity of the situation mentioned above. ECS sees that gap and labels it increased profits. We see the gap and say that, disregarding any possible inaccuracies, we know it to be explained by increases in non-inflation based costs together with declining circulation levels, not profit increases.
Elsevier has consistently conducted itself as an honest and ethical member of the international scientific publishing community. It has earned the respect and trust of thousands of leading scientists around the world. We feel the criticism encouraged by you and this report is not justified.
We fear that to proceed along at least some of the paths recommended in this study will not further the libraries' mission of enhancing research communication. Instead, I would like to pose the question of how the report can help all of us to find solutions in order to fulfill the need of scientists while recognizing the constraints in library budgets. We invite any and all of your members who have an honest desire to work with publishers for better service to the research community to contact us for further discussion.
Sincerely,
Karen Hunter
Vice President and br>
Assistant to the Chairman
Webster's response (copies sent to all ARL member directors):
August 7, 1989
Ms. Karen Hunter
Elsevier Science Publishers
655 Avenue of the Americas
New York, N.Y. 10010
Dear Ms. Hunter:
Thank you for your letter of July 21. It is a carefully considered response to the recent REPORT OF THE ARL SERIALS PRICES PROJECT. I would like both to respond to the specific technical issues you raise, and to address several of the broader issues related to the scholarly communication process. I have also forwarded your letter to Economic Consulting Services (ECS). I will follow, in as close order as possible, the points raised in your letter.
COSTS AND COST INCREASES. ECS makes very open and direct reference in its report to the difficulties encountered in developing the cost indexes. Both ECS and ARL would welcome specific cost data from commercial publishers, as there is no evidence so far that the cost elements mentioned in your letter increased at higher levels than the major elements measured by ECS. Your comments regarding cost increase are too general for me to provide detailed response, particularly since they lack specific cost data. We can appreciate that the change in the relationship with universities affected your business practices; again, relevant data is needed to assess the impact of this change. The serials report shows clearly that numerous changes in the ways scholarly communication is handled have occurred and continue to occur. These changes merit further study. It may be that some changes in the structure of scholarly communication could actually cover costs for efficient publishers.
JOURNAL TYPES. The list of titles used in the study was mailed to you on July 18. This informtion may or may not shed further light on the study's findings and on the research library perspective in general. Your points regarding journal types are, I believe, not relevant to this issue, as all the titles mentioned fit ARL's definition of serials. The list is a random sample representative of titles available for purchase by our members. In fact, the four titles you highlight were explicitely described as dropped from the study. Finally, since presumably cost is a major incentive for producing serials in countries other than the Netherlands, inclusion of such titles should probably result in lower costs to your company, and therefore be to your company's advantage.
EXCHANGE RATES. On the subject of exchange rates, the study's data determines that prices increased faster than publishers' costs, both when the U.S. dollar was weak and when it was strong. Figures 3 and 5 in the report confirm this phenomenon. Finally, on this point, ECS agrees that one worldwide price is acceptable, and notes that your interpretation of their perspective differs from what they intended to imply.
CIRCULATION LEVELS. As you may know, we attempted to obtain circulation data, and in most cases found it to be a well kept secret. Therefore, I am puzzled by your comments in this area. A simple solution would be for publishers to provide the data. Also, your remark that "the pressure to publish an ever increasing number of articles has led to larger journals (more pages) and to the formation of new journals," defines what seems to us to be a major part of the problem. We believe these trends can be influenced over time, and we would welcome the opportunity to address such issues jointly.
SUMMARY. I am pleased that you acknowledge the ECS study's finding that a significant gap occurs annually between publishers' prices and identifiable cost increases. Two commercial publishers have informed me that gaps between cost and price increases have no relationship to level of profit. ARL wishes to be neither cynical nor naive, so, we will remain skeptical on that point until explicit data can clarify it.
Neither ARL nor ECS has made any assessments of the ethical nature of any commercial publisher. Simply put, we believe commercial publishers are entitled to compete in the market and to earn for themselves an appropriate profit. Similarly, libraries, as consumers, are entitled to influence the market through whatever legal means are available to them. Libraries will continue to focus on ensuring the distribution of important scholarly and scientific information in as cost-effective manner as possible.
Finally, it must be said that the ECS study is only one of many that contributes [sic] to our understanding of the serials situation. The ARL report describes that understanding and recommends ways in which the library and scholarly communities can contribute to a more effective and affordable scholarly communication process. ARL and its members will be important partners in this effort and, of course, welcome any serious attempts by publishers to work with us. ARL is setting up an Office of Scientific and Academic Publishing to address these issues. Through this new project, our members can respond as a community to your invitation to work with publishers to find solutions to the current difficulties in this aspect of scholarly communication.
Sincerely,
Duane E. Webster
Executive Director
11.4 RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY PRICING
Peter S. Graham, Rutgers University; BITNET: GRAHAM@PISCES
Excerpt from the Autumn, 1989 issue of RENAISSANCE NEWS & NOTES, the newsletter of the Renaissance Society of America (publisher of the journal RENAISSANCE QUARTERLY):
the dues are to be increased .... Regular memberships will increase to $45 .... Institutional subscriptions will rise to $55 ....We have made a conscientious decision not to raise institutional fees quite as high as the market will bear. It is this practice, we understand, that has persuaded some heads of collections to "deacquisition" humanities journals, a practice we must all profoundly regret. We hope library enrollments will grow with this pricing policy, and look forward to enhanced subscription figures to result from the summer's recruitment efforts ....
11.5 SETTING UP A MAIL FORWARDING GROUP ON
BITNET
Mary McLaren, Head of Acquisitions, Univ of Kentucky Libraries,
Lexington KY 40506. (606) 257-2543; BITNET: MCLAREN@UKCC.UKY.
EDU.
I have found that within the University of Kentucky Libraries the interest in serials pricing extends well beyond the Acquisitions and the Collection Development departments. In order to share the NEWSLETTER ON SERIALS PRICING ISSUES with faculty in a number of departments, I offered to route the NEWSLETTER to them in either the paper or the electronic format, according to each recipient's personal preference.
Routing the paper copy posed no real problem, except that I first had to learn how to get the NEWSLETTER to print out in one uninterrupted continuous printout. (The "screen print" option was definitely not an acceptable print mode!)
Forwarding the electronic copy via BITNET was newer ground, however, in that I had never before set up a "group" to whom my mail should be forwarded. This procedure, once learned, proved to be equally easy to manipulate.
The BITNET procedure described below should work at any IBM site using a CMS operating system. If your E-mail runs on the Rice University mail program, this procedure should definitely work for you.
The first procedure is to set up a routing list via the NAMES command. If you have BITNET documentation, refer to the NAMES section. If you do not have such, you may wish to follow these brief "quick and dirty" instructions:
1. Log on to your system.
2. Type in the NAMES command.
3. Enter information on each individual to whom you want to route mail. (Fill in one screen per person.) You must enter a Nickname, a Userid, and a Node for each person. The remaining fields are optional.
4. Save the entry to your NAMES file by pressing the F4 (Save) key.
5. To add the next entry, first clear all the fields by pressing the F2 key (Empty Entry). Now fill in the information for the next person. Repeat as often as necessary.
6. When you are finished adding the personal entries, the next step is to create an entry for your NEWSLETTER distribution list. Do this by entering a nickname for the list itself. (I call mine NEWSLETTER.)
7. Type the nickname of each person on your routing list into the LIST field, entering one space between each nickname.
8. Be sure to save this entry with F4 (Save) just as you did for the personal entries.
9. Exit the screen with F3 (Quit).
When you receive your next issue of the NEWSLETTER, you will be all set up to forward it electronically to the colleagues listed under your distribution list's nickname.
1. When you are in your MAIL menu, place the cursor on the item you wish to forward and press F6 (Forward).
2. At the TO: prompt, enter your distribution list's nickname.
3. At YOUR NAME: enter your name (optional).
4. You may at this point enter a free text message if you wish.
5. When ready to send, press F5 (Send).
6. A message will appear asking you again if you are ready to send it. Press F5 once more to confirm.
Our system gives a little series of beeps as the file is being transmitted. You will get the message "OUTGOING MAIL LOGGED IN...." after the transmissions have all been completed. (I usually add myself to my distribution lists so I can check to see if the files have been transmitted correctly.)
7. Exit this procedure with F3 (Quit). If you added yourself to the distribution list, a copy of what you have just sent out should appear on your next mail menu, and all the people listed on your distribution list should have received their electronic copy of the NEWSLETTER, too!
Names can be added, deleted, and revised as necessary by bringing up the appropriate file(s) through the NAMES nickname command.
For additional clarification on the procedure, please feel free to phone or E-mail me at the address above.
These brief instructions have been adapted from INTRODUCTION TO BITNET, VM/CMS VERSION: A USERS GUIDE TO ELECTRONIC MAIL, by James R. Gerlund, University Computing Services, Computer Center, State University of New York at Buffalo, July 22, 1987. Modified at the University of Kentucky Computing Center by Alex Zekulin, September 23, 1988. (c) Copyright 1987 SUNY at Buffalo; (c) Copyright 1986 Rice University. Copying is by permission of SUNY at Buffalo and Rice University.
11.6 HAMAKER'S HAYMAKERS
Chuck Hamaker, Louisiana State University, BITNET: NOTCAH@LSUVM.
TIME magazine, October 9, 1989. "The Secret in the Stacks: How the Library of Congress hid Pentagon Spending" notes that 84 million dollars was laundered through the Library of Congress for the Defense Department. DOD wanted to hire contractors and consultants without going through the competitive bid process required by law. Since LC did not have the same requirement, the money went to LC accounts, and consultants were hired, etc. for DOD. The library kept 15 percent of the funds as their cut, or about 12.6 million dollars.
Peter R. Young of the Faxon Institute has written the "Periodicals Prices 1987-1989 Update" for THE SERIALS LIBRARIAN. A preprint is available by contacting Faxon. Young notes that Sci-Tech journals average 4.5 times the average cost of Humanities and Social Science journals, but some Humanities and Social Science titles increased in price last year at unusually high rates, i.e., Psychology, 16.8 percent; Economic History, 14.6 percent; Philosophy, 11 percent; outranking some science areas.
An especially significant letter was sent to our Serials Department October 2, 1989, from Walter R. Tschinkel, President of the North American Section of the International Union for the Study of Social Insects (IUSSI). They publish INSECTES SOCIAUX through Masson Publishers in Paris. Because of various problems, they are considering severing the society's relationship with Masson and engaging another publisher. Bids in hand "would result in library subscriptions costing 30 - 40 percent less" than at present. The problem is that Masson owns copyright to the title, INSECTES SOCIAUX. Dr. Tschinkel asks if libraries would be willing to change their subscriptions from INSECTES SOCIAUX to the new journal. The IUSSI's editor and papers normally submitted to the journal would be withdrawn from Masson. The decision to move to a non-commercial publisher rests in part on the willingness of libraries to make this change. Dr. Tschinkel asks for libraries to write him or call (904) 644-4489 if they have any questions. Let's let him know that this action would be supported by the library community. His address: Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee FL 32306-3050.
11.7 DOWNLOADING THE NEWSLETTER FROM A VAX TO A
PC
Kerry Kresse, Physics Library, University of Wisconsin - Madison;
BITNET: KRESSE@WISCMACC.
GENTLE READER: These directions for downloading are used at the University of Wisconsin -- Madison. We are on a Vax VMS system, and I use Procomm version 2.4.2. Essential to the use of these directions are the basic prompts that our e-mail system provides. Those who use the Vax for e-mail only have a $$ prompt once online to the Vax. (Contrast this to those who use it for other purposes; they have a single $ prompt.) Also, once in e-mail, the prompt that we see is: EMail.
I am no computer whiz, but if you cannot get these directions to work, please feel free to contact me on e-mail or by phone (608) 262-9500. I also recommend your local computing center as a first resource. GOOD LUCK!
1. At the $$ prompt, type SET TERMINAL/PAGE=0
2. At the $$ prompt, type EMAIL
3. Go to the directory where you have the messages you wish to download, and list the
directory. (I like to put the files that I want to
download into a separate e-mail directory.)
4. Before you download, you must open the "log." Check the bottom
right of the screen on Procomm, and you should see the lighlighted
phrase, "log closed." Hit
5. At this point, Procomm prompts you for the file name where you want
the downloaded files to go. If you simply hit
6. Now "read" the messages that you want to download. As the message
is scrolling by, it is being entered into the log.
7. When you are through "reading" the files you want to download, you
must close the log. Do this by hitting
8. It probably would be a good idea not to delete the messages till
you're sure that they made it safely to your pc.
9. At this point, exit e-mail, then Procomm, head into WordPerfect and
edit the file as you would any other.
The "business part" of downloading is your communications software. If
you use Smartcom or another software program, the principle is the
same even if commands and/or procedures vary. Similarly, if you do not
have WordPerfect 5.0, but another word processing software such as
WordStar, the difference is in how to open and edit the file. With
other software programs you may have to read up on how to transfer
ASCII files.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Readers of the NEWSLETTER ON SERIALS PRICING ISSUES are encouraged to
share the information in the newsletter by electronic or paper methods. We would appreciate
credit if you quote from the newsletter.
=====================================================================
The NEWSLETTER ON SERIALS PRICING ISSUES (ISSN: 1046-3410) is published as
news is available by the American Library Association's
Association of Library Collections and Technical Services, Publisher/
Vendor-Library Relations Committee's Subcommittee on Serials Pricing
Issues. Editor: Marcia Tuttle, BITNET: TUTTLE@UNC.BITNET; Faxon's
DataLinx: TUTTLE; ALANET: ALA0348; Paper mail: Serials Department,
C.B. #3938 Davis Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
Chapel Hill NC 27599-3938. Committee members are: Deana Astle (Clemson University),
Mary Elizabeth Clack (Harvard University), Jerry
Curtis (Consultant), Charles Hamaker (Louisiana State University),
Robert Houbeck (University of Michigan), and Marcia Tuttle. EBSCONET
customers may receive the newsletter in paper format from EBSCO. Back
issues of the newsletter are available electronically free of charge
through BITNET from the editor and in paper from ALCTS, American Library Association,
50 East Huron Street, Chicago IL 60611. Paper
issues are priced at $5.00 per issue, per copy, prepaid. Billing
charge: $2.00, plus postage.
=====================================================================