1. Clare Holmes Sales Director Cengage Learning EMEA Presentation to ICOLC Stockholm, 1 October 2007

2. Agenda Cengage Learning – The Company Gale Product Portfolio Meeting the Digital Challenge Decision Influencing Factors Other Factors Working with Consortia Conclusions

3. Cengage Learning – The Company Formerly Thomson Learning Cen [Centre] gage [Engagement] in Learning: CENGAGE LEARNING Sold in July 2007 to Apax Partners and OMERS Capital Partners Imprints remain, eg Gale, MacMillan

4. Overview Reference Digital Archives & Collections Journal Collections & Resource Centers

5. Product Portfolio Reference, research, teaching & learning resources Reference: Directories, Encyclopedias, Aggregated Newspapers and Journals Teaching & Learning: Resource Centers, Micro- Archives, Historical Newspapers Research: Online monographs, periodicals, unpublished materials

6. Reference Online Topical, International, Available as Single Titles or Build own Collection Cross-searchable

7. Journals, Reference, Newspapers

8. Biz/ed Premier

9. Notable collections…

10. “Staying in touch with ‘what users want’ has become both a matter of ‘survival’ and a question of professional expertise and self- respect.” Reg Carr Director of University Library Services & Bodley’s Librarian University of Oxford

11. Gale - Publishing Aims Convert “core” titles to online from film vault –Eg ECCO, Times Digital Archive, Making Of the Modern World Respond to teaching/research focus –Eg History of Slavery (Colonial Studies) –Eg The Economist (Global economy, multi-nationalism) Push boundaries of digitisation –Eg New Imaging (colour in C19th periodicals) –Eg Creation/expansion of metadata (State Papers) –Eg Non-English language content (Euro newspapers)

12. Meeting the Digital Challenge Digital investment options –Existing back-files –Primary source materials –Blending of multi-media, genres and teaching/learning/research methods into new user experiences –Partnership opportunities

13. Meeting the Digital Challenge Publishers’ challenges –Balance investment and product development with market opportunity (ROI) –Create collections and accommodate the budgetary constraints of libraries –Google initiatives Libraries’ challenges –Define digital library strategy beyond current “exceptional” funds and budget constraints –Shift investment from hard assets to access, bandwidth, new types of research & learning tools

14. Impact of Success Example: ECCO –Consortia deals via JISC, DFG, UKB, DEFF, FinELib, Ireland, Greece, France, South Africa, Australia –National Libraries in Europe and Australasia –Academic Libraries worldwide –“Transformed” scholarship of the period –Raised expectations in the community –Has pushed Gale to invest heavily in new projects, imaging techniques, technologies etc

15. 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 State Papers Online, 1509-1714 EEBO EEBO (PQ) Eighteenth Century Collections Online Printed Books Manuscripts/Documents Newspapers & Periodicals The Times 1785- 2000 Archive C19th UK Periodicals C19 British Library N/papers C18 British Library Newspapers ‘Economist’ Historical Archive, 1843-2003 History & Culture through Media C19 American Newspapers Making of the Modern World: Goldsmiths’- Kress Collection Sabin’s Americana, 1500-1926 2000

16. Impact of Success Example: Times Digital Archive –Consortia deals via JISC, DFG, UKB, Ireland, Australia, plus National Libraries in Europe and Australasia; > 50 academic institutions in US –Huge cross-sector subscription base eg public libraries worldwide –Increased investment from Gale into newspaper digitisation projects (including C19th US Newspapers) –More collaboration on digitisation projects with newspapers and holding libraries, eg BL

17. 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 17 th -18 th Century The Burney Collection 19 th Century BL Newspapers 19 th Century UK Periodicals Times Digital Archive The Largest Collection of British Newspapers Online The Economist Digital Archive

18. Decision influencing factors How does the project emerge? –Own editorial development –Partnership eg BL, European libraries –Fits with existing capabilities –Meets new or unmet needs –Competition and/or duplication –Best investment opportunity –Appeal to largest audience

19. Decision influencing factors Faculty/librarian consultation –Evaluate proposition –Contribution to libraries’ portfolio –Contribution to learning/understanding Specification –Interactivity required, eg Wikis, VLEs –Production requirements eg OCR –Scoping of project in context of existing programming/platform capability

20. Decision influencing factors Business Models –Costs of developing the collection –Potential Sales (global) –Sales phasing –Pricing –Return on investment –Payment schedules

21. Other Factors: Consortia Requirements Functionality Ideal Situation: –Users can cross search all products Gale’s Current Position –Resources sit on different platforms –“Like” resources sit on “like” platforms Future Position (2008 onwards) –Single, adaptable, multi-purpose platform –Cross-searchable by all/some media types –“Familiar” interface for little user training –Pre-packed platform for fast product development within Gale and for partners

22. Search all Gale Databases Search All Other Databases Search Library Catalog Search Open Web New Platform

23. Other Factors: Consortia Requirements Fair Use Ideal Situation: –“Fair Use” for all products Gale’s Position –Gale supports “fair use” –Have to meet needs of customers & IP Holders We allow –Personal saving; Printing –Emailing; Book-marking and linking We support –Text Creation Partnership project –Host libraries by supplying page images

24. Other Factors: Consortia Requirements Archiving Ideal Situation: –Comply with ICOLC wishes Gale’s Position –Often offer choice of purchase or subscription –Purchasers receive data/image files on tape –Own raw data in perpetuity –Option to host collection locally –Institution/consortium has to develop interface Gale’s Future Position –Need a non-Gale electronic hosting option, BUT lack of capable or willing provider to support library market

25. Other Factors: Consortia Requirements Licensing Ideal Situation: –One license fits all Gale’s Position –Journals databases – limit embargoes Perpetual licenses for journals & newspapers –Limited by terms from publishers & IP Holders Digital Collections –Purchasers guaranteed access –Purchasers receive content load of text/images Model Licenses –Try to accommodate existing clauses – but Digital Collections are NOT journals

26. Challenges – working with consortia Understanding –Expectations of individual libraries –Decision making process –Who to talk to –Budget –Consortia strategy for collection development –Collaboration between consortia members

27. Challenges – working with Consortia Consultation Process –Agreement on methodology –Communication to the community –To librarians only? –Include academics? –Timing Trials –Creation of specific websites –Online feedback form –Share results

28. Challenges – working with consortia Enabling a sale - considerations –Potential sales to individual institutions –Departmental (faculty) funding or library budget –Pricing models to suit different sectors –What is “fair” to all parties? –National v regional

29. Pricing Models (i) Model Purchase + Hosting Fee Purchase only Purchase + Standing Order Subscription Comments High one-off payment; low on- going costs; institution/consortium owns raw data; access via Cengage Institution/consortium owns raw data and hosts content; no on- going access fees High up-front payment; planned on-going ordering Low initial payment; higher on- going costs; institution does not own content

30. Pricing Models (ii) Recognising the differences –Price to market – Tiers A and B –Price to institution size – 4 levels –“Niche” products –Increased number of participants & products –National/cross national deals –Payment plans

31. Worked Example SmallSmall/MediumMediumLarge Tier A4006008001000 Tier B280420560700

32. Collaboration – after the deal is done Driving Awareness and Use –Training – librarians, academics, students –Setting up access Promotion –Email information to academics –Information packs –Posters –Case studies –Online blogs

33. Conclusions We want to: –Develop climate for success –Make it possible for consortia to buy To make that happen, we all need to: –Increase understanding of others’ priorities and strategies –Appreciate each others’ “drivers” –Work together on pricing models to facilitate purchase –Work together on licensing models to accommodate changes in study/research

34. Thank You clare.holmes@cengage.com diane.thomas@cengage.com paul.fertl@cengage.com www.cengage.co.uk clare.holmes@cengage.com diane.thomas@cengage.com paul.fertl@cengage.com www.cengage.co.uk Questions?