 |
 |
Al, this is my understanding of the story so far in financial terms. Note that as a member of the Eduserv Foundation, I'm not directly involved in Athens-related discussions, particularly not in any contractual negotiations with the JISC, but I do see stuff flying past occasionally. In this case I've had to talk to others here for the detail... Nicole has already indicated the rough area of the JISC offer - for 2008/2009, it was £111k before VAT. When this offer was initially made we indicated that it did not approach the full economic cost of universal gateway provision in the 2008/2009 environment. At the JISC suggestion we drafted proposals in October whereby payments by the JISC were related to institutional subscriptions level to OpenAthens. The more institutions subscribed to OpenAthens (for its benefits in addition to gateways), the less the JISC were required to pay for universal gateway provision. The maximum additional payment was £575k in 08/09, reducing to £345k in 2010/11. The response to this offer came from the JISC in December, when they reiterated the offer to £111k in 2008/2009, rising to £116k in 2010/2011. They confirmed this offer was non-negotiable earlier this month. It is important to remember that that the gateways depend on the Athens service continuing. With the termination of the JISC central contract for Athens services to universities and colleges in July, the cost of the gateways thereafter has to include a contribution to the costs of maintaining the Athens service. As I said in my previous message, I think we have a simple disagreement about what represents value for money here. The fall-out from this is far from simple of course and those of you in institutions will have to think about your next steps. FWIW, my impression (from the inside) is that as a non-profit educational charity, Eduserv is certainly not trying to make a killing in setting its prices in the way it has. If it did, it would just leave me with a bigger headache about how to push any surpluses back into the community! :-) You are free, of course, to draw your own conclusions about whether we run services efficiently, whether we have got our sums right, and how we compare in value-for-money terms with the other services and projects funded by the JISC. Hopefully the figures above will help with that. But we do have to try to remain sustainable in order to continue to give value to the community. Andy -- Head of Development, Eduserv Foundation http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/ http://efoundations.typepad.com/ [log in to unmask] +44 (0)1225 474319 > -----Original Message----- > From: Discussion list for Shibboleth developments > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roberts A.L. > Sent: 23 January 2008 09:58 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: LA (what are the costs?) > > Dear Andy, > > Many thanks for offering some insight into the negotiation > process, even if it comes from the inside of one of the camps ;). > > Would you mind letting us know how much Eduserv was asking > from the JISC to continue to provide the service? > > If anyone from the JISC feels like letting the list know how > much cash they were offering that would be nice to know too. > > I am interested because of the potential cost that sites may > have to shoulder if they are required to continue using > ATHENS only resources until SPs catch up with shib installs. > It would appear to me that in such a situation the community > would be effectively paying twice for the gateway/ATHENS > (individually and through top slicing as an implied cost) > even if the JISC as of yesterday have decided not to spend > the community's cash on the gateway. > > I am also interested to know what the difference in price > would be - how much per site if we all pay through the JISC > compared to individual subscriptions...? > > Cheers, > AL > > Mr. Alexander Roberts > Web Development Officer > Library and Information Services > Swansea University/Prifysgol Abertawe > +44 (0)1792 513239 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Discussion list for Shibboleth developments > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Andy Powell > Sent: 22 January 2008 17:19 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: LA (mixed messages) > > Al, > I'll try and answer but coming from inside one of the two > organisations concerned I'll concede that you may feel like I > haven't 'clarified' > anything! :-) > > Clearly, you are witnessing a disagreement. Whether it is of > the school playground variety is a different matter. I tend > to disagree at this stage, though I'm sure something can be > arranged if necessary. > > Also clearly, the disagreement has to do with cost vs. value > - the cost at which we felt it was viable to offer the > gateways was in excess of the value the JISC chose to put on > them - there was a disagreement about price, pure and simple. > Who was right and who was wrong in that disagreement is > another matter of course, as is the issue of whether some > middle ground could have been reached. I'm not aware that we > refused to negotiate (I could be wrong) but in any case, from > what I've seen, the gap between the two sides was such that I > doubt any negotiated agreement could have been reached even > if a longer period of negotiation had been allowed. > > Clearly, this is unfortunate for the community. We did not > take our side of the decision making lightly, at least as far > as I understand it. > I'm sure the JISC would say the same. I'm equally sure that > both sides of the argument feel like they are taking the > 'best' decision in the circumstances. Sometimes things just > don't work out. > > The bottom line, from our perspective as an educational > charity, is that we have to take not-for-profit business > decisions around those services that we believe to be of > value to the community in order to ensure the onging > viability of the charity overall - we can't simply provide > services at well below our own costs. > > Andy > -- > Head of Development, Eduserv Foundation > http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/ > http://efoundations.typepad.com/ > [log in to unmask] > +44 (0)1225 474319 > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Discussion list for Shibboleth developments > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roberts A.L. > > Sent: 22 January 2008 13:18 > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: LA (mixed messages) > > > > Dear list, > > > > > > > > Can someone clarify who is actually not willing to > negotiate...? The > > press releases from both sides say that the other is to blame - see > > below. > > > > > > > > The JISC statement says: > > > > Eduserv had asked JISC for a non-negotiable price for the > provision of > > the Gateway Services significantly above what the JISC > Board believed > > could be justified as a balanced or fair expenditure within > the JISC > > services budget and as a value for money option for the education > > community as a whole. > > > > The Eduserv statement says: > > > > > > > > "The non-negotiable offer we received from the JISC did not > approach > > the projected full economic cost of the service in > > 2008/2009 or provide a sustainable basis for the future. " > > > > > > > > Am I the only one that feels like they are witnessing a school > > playground argument? > > > > > > > > AL > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr. Alexander Roberts > > > > Web Development Officer > > > > Library and Information Services > > > > Swansea University/Prifysgol Abertawe > > > > +44 (0)1792 513239 > > > > > > > > >