Reply to Fred Friend

["Joseph Esposito" <espositoj@gmail.com>]

Fred Friend wrote:

 "To answer the point about the effect of "big deals", they harm
 NFPs in transferring library money away from individual
 subscriptions (often NFPs) into block subscriptions from the
 major (usually commercial) publishers. Yes, libraries pushed for
 these "big deals" but are now beginning to realise the
 disadvantage in locking up a large proportion of their budgets."

Fred, I am not a librarian, but my understanding is that the 
library community has mixed views of the Big Deal.  In any event, 
I hope we all can agree that no publisher put a gun to a 
librarian's head to purchase a Big Deal package.

What concerns me is your comment that librarians "are now [!] 
beginning to realise the disadvantage . . . ."  Now? How about 
some forward thinking, a bit of strategy work?  The Big Deal is 
an inevitable outcome of online material marketed on a 
subscription basis.  While at Encyclopaedia Britannica in 1993, 
we discussed the inevitability of Big Deal marketing, years 
before there were Big Deals, nor was there even a Web browser at 
that time.  The emerging Big Deal marketing world was a factor in 
the decision to sell the company.

I fear that NFP publishers and libraries are continuing to 
operate with very limited resources going into strategic 
planning.  Today's problem may be the Big Deal, but what is 
tomorrow's?

Meanwhile, the commercial publishers continue to think big and 
long-term.  Note, for example, the recent announcment from John 
Wiley about starting a journal on text mining.  Wiley is a very 
smart company.  The journal may be successful in itself, but it 
also provides Wiley with a front seat at the emergence of text 
mining as an important application for intellectual property. 
Where are the libraries?  Where are the NFPs?

--
Joe Esposito