79 mc hugh
TRANSCRIPT
Pricing Electronic Pricing Electronic Content: Project MUSE® Content: Project MUSE®
Aileen M. McHughDirector of Project MUSE
http://muse.press.jhu.eduThe Johns Hopkins University Press
Society of Scholarly PublishingJune 2, 2004
San Francisco
What is Project MUSE®?What is Project MUSE®?
• A collection of more than 250 journals in the arts, humanities, and social sciences from more than 40 publishers.
• Launched in cooperation with the Milton S. Eisenhower Library, and later the 11 founding publishers, by The Johns Hopkins University Press? America’s oldest university press, dating to 1878.
• A collection of more than 250 journals in the arts, humanities, and social sciences from more than 40 publishers.
• Launched in cooperation with the Milton S. Eisenhower Library, and later the 11 founding publishers, by The Johns Hopkins University Press? America’s oldest university press, dating to 1878.
Project MUSE® FundingProject MUSE® Funding
• Launch was funded by $720,000 in grants from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and the National Endowment for the Humanities.
• Original mission was to publish electronically the journals of The Johns Hopkins University Press
• Launch was funded by $720,000 in grants from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and the National Endowment for the Humanities.
• Original mission was to publish electronically the journals of The Johns Hopkins University Press
Important MilestonesImportant Milestones
• 1998? PM operating at breakeven• 1999? 11 other publishers joined PM and
the number of journals jumps from 42 to more than 100
• 2004? more than 40 publishers and 257 journals
• 1998? PM operating at breakeven• 1999? 11 other publishers joined PM and
the number of journals jumps from 42 to more than 100
• 2004? more than 40 publishers and 257 journals
Project MUSE® 2004Project MUSE® 2004
• 95% renewal rate• 82% domestic, 18% foreign• Relationships with 40 consortia worldwide• 9 million worldwide have access
• 95% renewal rate• 82% domestic, 18% foreign• Relationships with 40 consortia worldwide• 9 million worldwide have access
Case history in e-pricingCase history in e-pricing
• Muse and the consortia “grew up” together• Relationship was mutually beneficial• Consortia and e-distribution opened up new
markets domestically and internationally• Consortia discounts worked initially
because e-content was incremental revenue
• Muse and the consortia “grew up” together• Relationship was mutually beneficial• Consortia and e-distribution opened up new
markets domestically and internationally• Consortia discounts worked initially
because e-content was incremental revenue
How is e-pricing different?How is e-pricing different?
• Need a lot of customer data to determine a price• New functionality, eg, usage statistics, perpetual
access to purchased content, CrossRef, tools • Sales more important than marketing• Licenses needed• User services and sales work together• Customer service much more technical
• Need a lot of customer data to determine a price• New functionality, eg, usage statistics, perpetual
access to purchased content, CrossRef, tools • Sales more important than marketing• Licenses needed• User services and sales work together• Customer service much more technical
Model Became UnsustainableModel Became Unsustainable
• Consortia mergers led to high volume discounts
• Print cancellations escalated• Full Collection grew too large, and
scope of journals became uneven• Libraries began canceling “Big Deals”
• Consortia mergers led to high volume discounts
• Print cancellations escalated• Full Collection grew too large, and
scope of journals became uneven• Libraries began canceling “Big Deals”
What Next?What Next?
• Worked with October Ivins and Judy Luther to develop new e-pricing models that meet the needs of librarians and publishers
• Pricing, though, not enough!• Need to also re-engineer publisher
royalties, collection development standards, fulfillment, and customer and publisher relationship management
• Worked with October Ivins and Judy Luther to develop new e-pricing models that meet the needs of librarians and publishers
• Pricing, though, not enough!• Need to also re-engineer publisher
royalties, collection development standards, fulfillment, and customer and publisher relationship management
MethodologyMethodology
• Interviews with publishers• Interviews with 19 major influencers in library
purchasing• Open hearing at ALA Midwinter• Focus groups with librarians• Web survey of >200 customers
• Interviews with publishers• Interviews with 19 major influencers in library
purchasing• Open hearing at ALA Midwinter• Focus groups with librarians• Web survey of >200 customers
What did we consider?What did we consider?
• Who are the primary and secondary domestic and international markets in order of priority?
• How does each customer group want to buy the content?• How do the publishers, societies, and authors want to sell the
content?• What fulfillment capabilities are needed to implement the
pricing? What capability is available and affordable in the short term and in the long term?
• What are the distribution channels for each customer group?
• Who are the primary and secondary domestic and international markets in order of priority?
• How does each customer group want to buy the content?• How do the publishers, societies, and authors want to sell the
content?• What fulfillment capabilities are needed to implement the
pricing? What capability is available and affordable in the short term and in the long term?
• What are the distribution channels for each customer group?
The ResultsThe Results
• Primary customers are libraries at doctoral and bacculaureate liberal arts institutions
• Doctoral institutions want individualized packages, whereas bacculaureate liberal arts institutions prefer collections
• Publishers want to sell their content in collections• Fulfillment system supports collections and flex
plans for groups, not individual libraries• Distribution channels are consortia
• Primary customers are libraries at doctoral and bacculaureate liberal arts institutions
• Doctoral institutions want individualized packages, whereas bacculaureate liberal arts institutions prefer collections
• Publishers want to sell their content in collections• Fulfillment system supports collections and flex
plans for groups, not individual libraries• Distribution channels are consortia
Preliminary Solutions to PricingPreliminary Solutions to Pricing• Replace consortia volume discounts with a more customized
pricing grid:– Use tiers based on the Carnegie classification of
institutions of higher education (www.carnegiefoundation.org)
– Use COUNTER-compliant usage quartiles to address different levels of usage among similarly classed institutions
• Limit package price increases • Move to more customizable packages and smaller collections• Communicate changes individually to subscribers and review
options with them
• Replace consortia volume discounts with a more customized pricing grid:
– Use tiers based on the Carnegie classification of institutions of higher education (www.carnegiefoundation.org)
– Use COUNTER-compliant usage quartiles to address different levels of usage among similarly classed institutions
• Limit package price increases • Move to more customizable packages and smaller collections• Communicate changes individually to subscribers and review
options with them
Solution to Uneven ContentSolution to Uneven Content• In the short term, develop multidisciplinary collections with
appropriate price points for the research, four-year college, and community college markets. Use criteria for collections.
• Instead of continuing to expand existing packages, offer new packages
• Consider subject-specific packages? but don’t make customers of different packages pay twice for same content
• Long-term goal is customizable packages for each library. Considerable costs for fulfillment software, accounting, and training.
• In the short term, develop multidisciplinary collections with appropriate price points for the research, four-year college, and community college markets. Use criteria for collections.
• Instead of continuing to expand existing packages, offer new packages
• Consider subject-specific packages? but don’t make customers of different packages pay twice for same content
• Long-term goal is customizable packages for each library. Considerable costs for fulfillment software, accounting, and training.
Current Flex Plan Current Flex Plan
• A group of five or more libraries can order a custom package
• Custom packages have higher price because of customer service set-up and maintenance
• A group of five or more libraries can order a custom package
• Custom packages have higher price because of customer service set-up and maintenance
The Future of E-pricing?The Future of E-pricing?
• Will depend on the content and the discipline• Flexible and customized pricing will increase for all e-content,
which will in turn require nimble fulfillment systems• For some content, customization will justify higher prices• Sales through discovery tools such as Google will increase• Publishers will seek new markets outside the domestic
academic library community
• Will depend on the content and the discipline• Flexible and customized pricing will increase for all e-content,
which will in turn require nimble fulfillment systems• For some content, customization will justify higher prices• Sales through discovery tools such as Google will increase• Publishers will seek new markets outside the domestic
academic library community