3. Key Predictability Principles
• Think about increases on a percentage
basis rather than an absolute basis
• For consortia - Distribute costs as
broadly and evenly as possible - % of
current spend…
• Separate transferred subscription cost
“increases” from real increases*
4. Model A for greater predictability
Takeover fee = scaled addition to the
annual price increase % (API aka „price cap‟)
e.g. given an API of x% Takeover fee is and
additional fee of
1-5 titles = +.5%
6-10 titles = +1%
11-15 titles = +1.5%, etc.
With an exception for major acquisitions
5. Model B - A more complex &
less predictable alternative
Takeover fee = scaled % of acquired title
list price (e.g. match to % of list price each
library pays for the full package)
This could simplify to (and rationalize?)
model A if acquisitions can average around
a consistent and reasonable target
6. Some benefits & challenges
of these models
Benefits
• Greater predictability
(A)
• Fewer libraries &
consortia opting not to
maintain the full
current collection
Challenges:
• Society Royalty Models
Issues:
• Legacy-based
• Too much emphasis on
takeover title list price?
(B)
7. If publishers want to continue to
grow their journal packages…
• Offering two big deal packages (one fixed & one
growing) may be a reasonable compromise
Afterthoughts
8. Packages are promoting the end
of individual subscriptions
• subscribed vs unsubscribed titles within a
package have lost their meaning in a Full
Collection Post cancellation access world
• Some libraries still want to track them for
historical budget reasons
• Societies still receive royalties based on
historical subscription lists that no longer reflect
the relative value of titles to the library
• Future conversations should include librarians
and editors / society representatives
Afterthoughts