 |
 |
Lesley et al, --On 03 December 2002 15:09 +0000 Lesley Crawshaw <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > It does seem a much fairer pricing policy to base pricing on how much > use an institution is likely to make of such "subscriptions" than to > have a pricing policy like that of Nature that is based purely on full > FTE figure for all staff, students and researchers. It also seems much fairer to base a subscription price on usage, FTEs, or some other approximation of 'need' rather than one single price like we still accept (expect?) for print subscriptions. Shouldn't a university with a small chemistry department containing few researchers pay a lower price for a _print_ subscription to Tetrahedron Letters (or Organic Letters!) than a university with a large 5* chemistry department packed full of postgrads and postdocs? Why do libraries never demand differential pricing for print subscriptions? Terry Bucknell Electronic Resources Manager Harold Cohen Library University of Liverpool PO Box 123 Liverpool L69 3DA Tel: +44 (0)151 794 5408 Fax: +44 (0)151 794 5417 Email: [log in to unmask]