Ok, let me get this right. One week back from Market, home again home again jiggety jig I forget everything I learned.
PDA = patron-driven acquisitions = your catalog has lots of videos listed but patron choices determine what you buy. In the perfect world you decide if you really want it for your collection, rather than succumb to yet another "Epiphany of the Dead" request. They are available but not in the sense of available. Patron sees a "request this from your library message." Or something to that effect. EBA = evidence-based acquisitions = you have catalog listings that actually are there, available for viewing for a certain period. After that period library picks the top 50, 100, 200 that percolate (I love that word!) to the top based on use and other factors. That becomes the basis for the next cycle. Then what happens? Another thickener in this soup is something I was reminded at in ABQ. For various reasons -- this is not an accusation, I'm curious as to why -- vendors aren't putting all their films in the streaming collections, e.g. Latest releases? Is that because they want to also preserve DVD sales ... A more definite income stream? This is sort of analogous to JSTOR's moving wall idea perhaps? Unless you want to hire me as a consultant to ask questions in the boardroom -- will pontificate for sorbetto -- please help me oh wisdom leaders. Best, Randal Sent from my iPad > On Oct 24, 2015, at 7:46 AM, Nancy E. Friedland <n...@columbia.edu> wrote: > > Monique, > > I agree that the tiered pricing needs further discussion. We seem to have > consensus that there is a preference for titles needed for course reserves on > a title by title basis however I question without attention to the tiered > pricing models, is this sustainable. Most recently, I was working with a > colleague to fill a long course reserves list for streaming access, most > titles were not available, and two that were found to offer streaming license > ended up costing more than $1,000 for purchase of DVD plus streaming. The two > titles were feature films (already owned in DVD format purchased elsewhere > for approximately $25 each long time ago), license is for in perpetuity as > long as the file maintains -- which is questionable, and we have to host the > content locally. I don't know if this is a sustainable model as we are only > going to see requests for streaming access for course reserves increase. We > are unable to fill all needs and the cost for these individual titles -- some > of which only offer one-year terms. > > I think PDA is an interesting model however it is difficult to predict budget > needs. I am not in favor of a model that may be turned off during a budget > year because usage was higher than expected. We had this happen last spring > -- which resulted in messages back to our users that the institution does not > license this title, which resulted in our technical staff needing to pull > titles not purchased for one-year from the catalog. Workflows in multiple > departments were impacted. This is separate from the acquisition budget issue > but still an important consideration for these new service models. > > EBA is interesting -- have you tried EBA? > > I appreciate this conversation! > > Nancy > > > > > >> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Threatt, Monique Louise >> <mthre...@indiana.edu> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> >> >> I too agree with Deg, and Nancy’s comments. >> >> >> >> My university subscribes to numerous platforms, many of which are mentioned >> below. >> >> >> >> My preference is to purchase the DVD w/ perpetual streaming rights which can >> then be hosted on a local server. Otherwise, for commercial platforms, using >> either the PDA or EBA model is my first choice. >> >> >> >> I would also like to see more independent, and studio filmmakers participate >> in future conferences to address economic ways to provide Rights to their >> films. >> >> >> >> I really liked what Ana said during her presentation at Market. To >> paraphrase, just because we are a large university does not mean that we >> have unlimited budgets to purchase streaming titles. >> >> >> >> The idea of “tiered-pricing” really needs to be restructured. Large >> universities continue to ‘take one for the team’ when it comes to purchasing >> documentary DVDs. We still pay the $200-400 price tag w/PPR, because we >> believe in the content, and we believe in supporting the filmmaker, and >> distributor. >> >> >> >> However, it’s not a sustainable model to purchase the $300 DVD, and then be >> charged an additional annual fee of $150 to have access to its streaming >> counterpart. There is also the concern (well, there are several) of vendors >> losing their right to distribute heavily-used documentaries. >> >> >> >> In closing, just because a school may have nearly 50,000 students, I assure >> you that less than 10% of the student population are actually accessing the >> films. A hike in stats usually is the result of a required film course >> assignment. >> >> >> >> There needs to be a better solution to lowering the cost of streaming so >> that it is affordable for all schools. Perhaps, vendors should market their >> streaming platforms based on budget, and not FTE. >> >> >> >> I know I’m not alone in my comments. >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> Monique Threatt >> >> Indiana University Bloomington >> >> >> >> From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu >> [mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Nancy E. Friedland >> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 5:20 AM >> >> >> To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu >> Cc: m...@shashwati.com >> Subject: Re: [Videolib] preferred streaming service >> >> >> I too agree. We are in the process of formulating a policy for streaming as >> new models emerge -- which has been under discussion and evaluation for many >> years. What seems to make the most sense in relation to course and research >> needs, library budget and workflow, is to move forward with database >> purchases (after careful evaluation of content) and limit title by title >> access for streaming license to those films specifically requested for >> course reserves as required viewing. This is an issue as the "curated" >> databases don't always include what is needed specifically for courses, we >> will need to pursue license for individual titles and accept that only a >> small but growing percentage of those films will we be able to obtain >> license for. The database packages are invaluable for the excellent content >> that continues to be in demand. I suspect the limited term agreements for >> individual titles are not sustainable in the long run -- whether it is >> locally hosted or linked to a hosting service by the vendor for a multitude >> of reasons -- budget being a major factor. I prefer in perpetuity but >> recognize that this is impossible in many cases. >> >> >> >> Nancy >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Carla Myers <cmye...@uccs.edu> wrote: >> >> I agree with everything Deg has said. While we do have subscriptions to film >> databases such as Alexander Street Press and Films on Demand I find it much >> more preferable to purchase titles on a case-by-case bases with perpetual >> streaming rights. >> >> Best, >> Carla Myers >> >> Faculty Director of Access Services and Scholarly Communications >> The Kraemer Family Library >> The University of Colorado Colorado Springs >> 1420 Austin Bluffs Parkway >> Colorado Springs, Colorado 80918 >> 719-255-3908 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu >> [mailto:videolib-boun...@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Deg Farrelly >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 1:22 AM >> To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu >> Cc: m...@shashwati.com >> Subject: Re: [Videolib] preferred streaming service >> >> Shashwati >> >> I am the media librarian for a large public university. >> >> It is my preference to be able to purchase videos directly, with streaming >> rights in perpetuity (life of file). >> >> I know that I am not alone in this preference and that many other librarians >> that I know, do not want an access model that requires us to repeatedly >> re-pay for the same content. >> >> We are accustomed to purchasing a DVD and owning the DVD for loan or >> classroom use. Having to pay for a title again after one or three years (a >> predominant licensing model) saps our acquisition budgets and limits our >> ability to acquire additional new content. >> >> Many of us have our own hosting systems. While we may (and most of us do) >> license content served on different companies¹ servers: Films on Demand, >> Docuseek2, Ambrose, Alexander Street, etc. (all of which offer us purchase >> opportunity in addition to term licensing) some prefer to host the content >> locally and do not need to rely on the hosting from another company. >> >> It is not necessary to limit your content to one service provider. Your >> streaming rights do not have to be exclusive. You can make your titles >> available on Alexander Street AND on Kanopy; on Films on Demand AND on >> NewDay. Or on all providers. AND, still license the rights to individual >> libraries. >> >> I am certain other librarians on this list will have other comments to make. >> >> deg farrelly >> Media Librarian/Streaming Video Administrator Arizona State University >> Libraries Tempe, AZ 85287-1006 >> 602.332.3103 >> >> >> >> >> >On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Shashwati Talukdar >> ><m...@shashwati.com> >> >wrote: >> > >> >Hi, >> > >> > >> >I am a filmmaker and some university libraries have approached us >> >asking for streaming. We are trying to choose a streaming platform, >> >Kanopy, Newday or Fandor. It would be good to know what librarians >> >prefer and what their experience is like so that we can make this easy >> >as possible for the librarians, teachers and students who want use our >> >films. >> > >> > >> >Any feedback would be very helpful. >> > >> > >> > >> >-- >> > >> >regards, >> > >> > >> >Shashwati Talukdar >> >> >> VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues >> relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, >> preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and >> related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective >> working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication >> between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and >> distributors. >> >> VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues >> relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, >> preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and >> related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective >> working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication >> between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and >> distributors. >> >> >> >> >> VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues >> relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, >> preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and >> related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective >> working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication >> between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and >> distributors. > > VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues > relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, > preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and > related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective > working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication > between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and > distributors.
VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
