Hi Sally, 

We still hold print versions but as the trend goes we spend quite some
money on e-versions too.

Yet we are not going that far into checking single issues but are having
a very close look at the usage statistics. On that basis we take
decisions whether a journal is worse holding as e-version after all.

We are bothered far more by interruped accesses and even this is hardly
manageable to have an eye on effectively. Here we rely totaly on our
users to claim missing accesses. But should we get no report because no
one uses the title - we would cancel at some point later.

It is a dilema somehow, with p-versions one knows what issue is in the
stock but does not know if it is used properly. With e-versions it is
the other way around but in the end the librarian has much more control
with the ability to relate costs to usage.

Greetings from Cologne,
Uta

Uta Heinecke

German National Library of Medicine /
Medical Dept. of University of Cologne 

Deutsche Zentralbibliothek fuer Medizin /
Medizinische Abt. der USB Köln 
Team 5 / E-Journals
Gleueler Strasse 60  
50931 Koeln
Germany

Phone: +49 (0) 2391 602 679 (Telework)
Phone: +49 (0) 221 478-7091 
Fax:   +49 (0) 221 478-7094

E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
http://www.zbmed.de

*********************************************************									







Am 04.10.06 14:14 schrieb Sally Elizabeth Rimmer
<[log in to unmask]>:

> Hi,
> 
> We are increasingly switching over to  e-only versions of journals and
> I wondered how other institutions managed virtual "checking in" of
> issues if they did it at all.  It is a costly business to pay for
> e-access and not receive it. However, it would be an enormous task to
> check every journal individually.
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> Sally Rimmer
> E-Resources Co-ordinator
> Library and Learning Resources
> University of Derby
> Kedleston Road
>