[Response to an earlier post. That post is below
followed by the responses.]
From: Margaret Porter <G.M.Porter.2_at_nd.edu>
>
>We are currently testing the web version of the OED from Oxford Univ.
>Press. What really has us wondering is the pricing of this product,
>essentially a static dictionary, priced at $2,700/year. We have the CD-ROM
>version of the OED, but apparently there are enhanced search and display
>capabilities in the web version. However, doesn't this seem like a terribly
>high annual fee for leasing access to this product.
>***************************************************************
>
>G. Margaret Porter
>Librarian, Reference Department
>University of Notre Dame
>Notre Dame IN 46556
=======#5=========
Margaret,
At the University of Texas at Austin the OED will cost us $10,000-$13,000 a
year.
We would have preferred a simultaneous user model that allowed the library
to control costs; or even a tiered value added model in which a scaled down
version of the dictionary could be made available at a lower price for the
general campus user, while the few campus users who needed access to the
full OED could have been provided access through a simultaneous user port.
In other words, we would have preferred some options.
At the price arranged through this national deal, it would be cheaper for
us to purchase printed copies of the OED, and just give one to each of the
interested departments on campus over the next few of years. While there
is obviously no comparison in functionality between the print and the web
version, all of us in collection development are stewards of scarce state
funds or student tuition fees, and it is our responsiblity to carefully
consider other potential uses to which we we could put this kind of
substantial annual expenditure.
In this case, I firmly believe that the publisher would have benefitted
from visting a hundred or so working libraries to see what prices those
libraries could afford. This would have also given OED a chance to
discover what type of online OED product the libraries actually wanted for
their particular users. Who knows, if the vendor had followed this path,
they may have even ended up making more sales then they will through this
national deal. At the current national price, some libraries will simply
not be able to afford access.
There are economists who are saying that the key to success in the internet
economy lies in establishing a good ongoing long-term relationship with
your customer. This relationship begins with effective two way
communciation which, among other things, establishes mutual understanding
and trust between the consumer and producer.
By pursuing a national deal at one fixed price, OED has forgone this
contact with their customers. One can't help but wonder if the product, the
price, the company, and libraries wouldn't have been better served if an
extended conversation about library needs and pricing had been allowed to
occur through the normal sales process.
In the present situation we have one "take it or leave it price" for one
undifferentiated product and no chance to negotiate, if we don't like the
pricing terms. I personally wish I had more options.
The web version of OED may very well be a fine product that is clearly
worth this price if not more. All I know for sure is that given all the
competing needs on our campus, I feel very uneasy about paying a potential
$130,000 over ten years for this web access, when we paid $5500 for a print
version of the OED that will easily last those same ten years. Will our
campus receive an additional $125,000 worth of academic value during the
next decade by having access to this web product? Maybe, but I've got an
uneasy nagging feeling that agreeing to spend this type of money on one
dictionary, is going to come back and haunt all of us one way or another.
--Dennis Dillon
Head, Collections and Information Resources
The University of Texas at Austin
Received on Wed May 24 2000 - 13:30:55 EDT