I'm with Gary on this, I personally am ready to cry uncle and throw in
the towel with per-title based pricing for packages.
Our Cambridge package came without per-title pricing this year (and
last) and everyone howled, but then once we got it, it was easier to pay
for, we did not have to do an EDI load into the ILS acquisitions system,
and though you still have to maintain the titles that change and those
that come in and out of the package, that is a piece of cake compared to
the management of a giant invoice with lots of per-title detail.

I imagine our serials vendors would probably love this too -- they have
valiantly been trying to keep this up on their end for us and while I
have so appreciated the work they've done, maybe it's time to quit this
and give up.

The problem of course, is that once you do this, there is probably no
going back.  What I am concerned about is how the publisher then
determines the "value" of the package and how that relates to your
historical journal collection.  Frankly, we are so deep into packages
now that there is really no way to link back to "historical" prices.
That's another assumption it is time to give up.

But the economic picture for the near future is rather gloomy, and if we
don't have per-title pricing, then the publishers need to realize that
our packages better have some flexibility because there will need to be
new models of cancellation practice, because guaranteed, there will be
cancellations of <something> in the future.

Eleanor Cook
Former serials librarian

Eleanor I. Cook

Professor & Intellectual Property
& Copyright Librarian
Belk Library, ASU Box 32026
Appalachian State University
Boone, NC 28608-2026
828-262-2786
828-262-2773 (fax)
cookei@appstate.edu