Email list hosting service & mailing list manager


Re: Taylor & Francis, Haworth, and pages per volume William Cohen 15 Jul 2006 01:03 UTC

Colleagues:

Over the past several years, Haworth Press has really had much more
pressure to
publish more pages per volume "as a whole" over a long-term period of
time.

Mitch provides wonderful insights, but might add even more more about
profit vs. non-profit postage rates, and then also domestic vs.
international?

On top of this, the postage rate for a pdf is about...what...?

Tonight's ominous and raging clouds of  war reminds us all how simpler
everything
was only five years ago.

Bill Cohen, Publisher
The Haworth Press, Inc.
www.HaworthPress.com

turitz@SFSU.EDU wrote:
> OK, I am going to add my $0.37 to this issue.  I checked with the U.S.
> Postal Service web site and found the following:
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> http://pe.usps.gov/mpdesign/misc_docs/mqc_html/mqc_2.htm
>
> WHAT IS PERIODICALS MAIL?
>
> Periodicals mail consists of newspapers and periodical publications,
> including magazines, published on a regular basis, at least four times
> per year. [Emphasis mine - MT]
>
> Only publications that meet the eligibility standards in Domestic Mail
> Manual 707.4.0 can qualify for Periodicals mailing privileges. To be
> eligible, a publication must fulfill specific qualification standards
> and meet the preparation requirements for the applicable presort
> levels, rates, and discounts.
> Basic Characteristics
>
> All authorized Periodicals publications must have the following
> characteristics:
>
>     * The publication must exhibit continuity from issue to issue (it
> is the same publication).
>     * The primary purpose of the publication is the transmission of
> information. It may not be designed primarily for advertising purposes.
>     * The publication must be issued at a specific, regular frequency.
> This frequency must be at least four times a year, with the intent to
> continue publishing indefinitely.
>     * The publication is formed of printed sheets.
>     * The publisher maintains a known office of publication from which
> the business of the publication is transacted. This location must be
> accessible during normal business hours and must be where the
> circulation records are maintained, or where they may be made
> available for examination and review.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> OK, so what does this mean in terms of our publishers' frequencies?
> Clearly, in order to qualify for the USPS discount rate, the
> publication must be published at least 4 times per year.  What happens
> if a publisher CLAIMS that it publishes 4 issues per year, but
> sometimes issues a combined issue?  Does that still count as 4 issues
> a year?  If yes, then that may explain why some publishers appear to
> only publish twice or three times a year, but number the volumes with
> combined issues.  I am not suggesting that such publishers are trying
> to thwart the USPS' regulations, when for practical reasons they fall
> behind due to production problems. However, this may explain how a
> possible  loophole allows publishers to have a frequency that varies
> without losing their status for the discounted mailing rate.
>
> I am not accusing any publishers of doing anything illegal or immoral,
> but am offering an explanation for why the publishers' stated
> frequency do not always match up with the officially stated
> publication frequency.
>
> So what I am saying here is we should not be vendor-bashing without
> knowing all the facts. Publishers frequently do not publish their
> products according to AACR2, but according to their own needs and
> purposes.  It is our job, as Serialists, to figure out what is going
> on with their publications and apply them to the cataloging rules we
> have established and how to make their publications work with our
> systems.
> If we start basing publishers for not keeping up with their own stated
> frequencies, then what's next?  Complaining that they have not put the
> ISSN on their publications? Or telling them that the ISSN is not
> enough and they must have included the SICI (extended ISSN which
> includes vol/issue information), OCLC number, and LCCN as well? Should
> we complain loudly that a publisher has changed their volume numbering
> without sufficient reason and demand that they change it back?  It's
> their publications and it's their decisions on how to publish them.
>
> Just my opinions,
>
> -- Mitch
>