Email list hosting service & mailing list manager


Re: Subscription package renewals - agency vs. direct? Ilyes, Henriette 24 Jun 2008 16:02 UTC

Thank you all who responded to my questions.

Please see the answers below:

We renew most of our packages direct with the publishers.  I've been
quite happy with the response to any problems that I have, and I often
find it easier to work with the publishers directly.  As you mention
below, we were having to verify the title lists directly anyway, then
hand it off to our vendor for them to invoice us and hit us with a
service charge.  Several of our publishers are invoicing us with a
single line invoice, instead of a title line invoice.  We have a
spreadsheet of titles and prices in most cases to show where that came
from, unless we have access to everything for that price, in which case
we stop worrying about a title list.  For the ones that still do invoice
us at the title level, we use a macro to load the invoice lines into our
ILS.  Giving up EDI invoicing, if you are using it, will be another
consideration in moving direct.  We just happened to have a replacement
when we did it.

************************************************************************

1. If you've done this, have you found it more effective/efficient
dealing directly with publishers?
A: In some cases, yes, generally when it is a consortial offer.

2. Have you found that publishers respond to claims, customer service
questions, etc. in a timely manner? Have you found that they would
rather deal with the subscription agency?
A: I suspect that more often, publishers prefer not to deal with
agencies. We tend to go with consortial offers when possible.  We also
go online only for most packages with few exceptions.

3. Do you feel overwhelmed when dealing with publisher title lists
directly throughout the year instead of the "big" renewals once or twice
a year?
A: I have not encountered this.  We get a renewal once a year for the
big packages.

Are there any other questions or issues you encountered?
A: Having a good customer rep is key.  We haven't had many problems with
packages, I'm happy to say.

************************************************************************

If you remove some of your publisher packages from the subscription
agency, you may reduce the amount of your invoice to a point where the
service charge on your remaining subscriptions  may increase.  Also, you
may lose an agency discount on the journal titles and pay the full price
through the publisher. If you take advantage of any early renewal /
early payment discounts by your subscription agency(s), this will also
be reduced.

We have 2 'consortia package' deals.

One 'consortia package' has the titles spread over 4 of our subscription
agents. Initially there was some confusion, but the agents now send us a
separate invoice for these titles. The consortia headquarters that deals
with the publisher sends us a list of the titles with agents which is
easily verified and any titles are added, or removed. If we wished, we
could move all of the titles to one agent and redistribute other titles
to help even out the accounts and limit the effects of another possible
(Faxon) debacle. However our current set up show that we try to treat
every agent fairly.

With the other package, it was such a mess at the renewal of the first
year, that it was decided to go directly to the publisher for our yearly
renewals.  This did have an effect on our service fee from some of the
subscription agents. A VERY late acceptance of the terms of this
publishers' package and signing of the contract, the conversion from
Print to E only on this package combined, payment for print already
having occured, with trying get to refund print payments from the
publisher's various publishing centers and then billing at E rates, was
so convoluted and is still not untangled satisifactorily that, well ...

Look at the contracts to see if it is financially advantageous to the
library, and worth a little extra effort on your part.  For me, that is
part of "And other duties as assigned" and I have felt the effort is
worth it to give the director another example for saying "we are doing
all that we can to get the most out of our budget .

************************************************************************

We use both vendors and direct.  We are direct with one of our major
publishers who does not like to work with vendors, and they do not
provide EDI Invoicing.  As a consequence we spend a lot of time with
manual entry and reconciling list.  It is time that I would prefer we
spend on other endeavors.  I looked at going through one of our two
vendors (Harrassowitz and Ebsco), but we just can't afford it right now.

One of our major benefits of working with vendors is the electronic
invoicing and reporting capabilities that vendors provide. Also as
titles move to different publishers, our vendors' services have been
very beneficial in that they chase these changes.  Often with these
changes, payment gets 'lost.'  Our vendor is great about working with
the publisher to prove payment.  When you look at moving away from a
vendor and work direct with the publisher, take into account the
services that you would lose.

I have no easy answer in regards to reconciling title list.  We have one
major publisher (different than the one mentioned above) that we get
through a consortium, and it is a nightmare.  Our consortium deals are
very time consuming.  Sometimes I wonder if the price break is worth the
extra man hours they require.  I would be interested in hearing how
others feel about this issue.

***********************************************************************

We do get the AMA journals directly, they are no problem. I also got
Haworth Press direct, but they got bought out, so I am now getting them
through my journal vendor. I did get the Elsevier health titles direct,
but every time there was a change with them it caused a problem, so I
changed them to my journal vendor...

***********************************************************************
We ordered our Haworth titles direct for several years. It was a cost
saving measure. With that publisher it was a lot of work as they were
frequently late and claiming was not easy as they did not respond. They
also sent out lots of renewals for every title. I had to check each one.
We went with EBSCO on this one.
I would consider it to save money if the publisher had an easy claim
setup and if the journals were usually on time.

Henriette

___________________________________
Henriette Ilyes
Library Information Systems Administrator
RAND Library Acquisitions
310-393-0411 ext. 7909
Henriette_Ilyes@rand.org

-----Original Message-----
From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum
[mailto:SERIALST@list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Ilyes, Henriette
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 4:17 PM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: [SERIALST] Subscription package renewals - agency vs. direct?

Hello,

We are in the process of renewing our subscriptions through our
subscription agent, and I was wondering if any of you out there have
ever tried to order or renew your major journal packages directly with
the publishers (e.g. Springer, Sage, Elsevier, etc) rather than through
your subscription agent.

Even though we subscribe through an agency, some publishers require us
to verify the subscriptions we receive through packages directly.  We
are also part of a consortium, so if lists (sometimes long lists) need
to be checked, I spend numerous hours on trying to figure out whose list
is accurate: publisher, consortium, the agent's, or our own records.

I'd like to know the following:

1. If you've done this, have you found it more effective/efficient
dealing directly with publishers?
2. Have you found that publishers respond to claims, customer service
questions, etc. in a timely manner? Have you found that they would
rather deal with the subscription agency?
3. Do you feel overwhelmed when dealing with publisher title lists
directly throughout the year instead of the "big" renewals once or twice
a year?

Are there any other questions or issues you encountered?

Thank you.

Henriette Ilyes
___________________________________
Henriette Ilyes
Library Information Systems Administrator
RAND Library Acquisitions
(310)393-0411 ext. 7909
(310)451-7029 (fax)
Henriette_Ilyes@rand.org

________________________________________________________________________
__

This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and
may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all
copies
of the original message.