[LAW-LIB:59531] RE: Electronic DB Pricing: Concurrent vs. Warm Body

From: Dunton, Linda (Linda.Lev-Dunton@wolterskluwer.com)
Date: Fri Jul 17 2009 - 13:28:09 PDT

  • Next message: Cade, Annette: "[LAW-LIB:59532] ABA Standing Committee on the Law Library of Congress Survey"

    Dear LAW-LIB readers,

    I am responding to the posting regarding CCH user pricing.

    CCH (Wolters Kluwer Law & Business) enabled an unrestricted license for
    our law firm customers and moved away from concurrent usage in response
    to their requests for a broader, more flexible pricing model. Pricing
    for this market is based on several factors including firm size, broad
    or narrow scope of a practice area, as well as how the specific practice
    group in question is viewed within the firm. This last area is what
    gives us some flexibility when there may be very few users of a
    particular product within a firm.

    With regards to Mr. Whelan's inquiry I would like to say that we work
    with all of our customers to create a licensing arrangement best suited
    for their organization. Our Regional Sales Manager is the best person to
    discuss the pricing most appropriate for the needs of your library. I
    will be glad to pass on his contact information off list if you'd like
    to speak with him.

    Sincerely,

    Linda Lev-Dunton
    Director, Segment Management
    Wolters Kluwer Law & Business
    847 267 2611
    Linda.Lev-Dunton@wolterskluwer.com

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu] On
    Behalf Of Glasbrenner, Gloria Jean
    Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 2:18 PM
    To: David Whelan; law-lib@ucdavis.edu
    Subject: [LAW-LIB:59520] RE: Electronic DB Pricing: Concurrent vs. Warm
    Body

    CCH tells me they will no longer price by concurrent users. They use
    firm head count. We have been forced to cancel some of there databases
    as I only have five or less users but they wanted me to pay for the
    entire firm. They all appear to be charging by attorney head count for
    law firms. Concurrent users often times make more sense.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu] On
    Behalf Of David Whelan
    Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 3:04 PM
    To: law-lib@ucdavis.edu
    Subject: [LAW-LIB:59519] Electronic DB Pricing: Concurrent vs. Warm Body

    Most of our database licenses are priced (at least initially, if not
    entirely) on a head count number. This seems to work in captive
    organizations (firms, law schools) but we serve over 40,000 lawyers
    and paralegals, many of whom are unable to access the services we
    license. One vendor with whom we work used a starting head count of
    20,000! We'd like to try to switch to a model based on concurrent
    usage.

    I've got two questions:

    - which vendors are willing to negotiate concurrent licenses instead
    of head count licenses? (I'm pretty sure CCH does, but correct me if
    I'm wrong)
    - how do you determine the price point for the concurrent users?

    Thanks in advance for any help.

    David.

    ________________________________

    NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission is for the use of the named
    individual or entity to which it is directed and may contain information
    that is privileged or confidential. It is not to be transmitted to or
    received by anyone other than the named addressee (or a person
    authorized to deliver it to the named addressee). It is not to be copied
    or forwarded to any unauthorized persons. If you have received this
    electronic mail transmission in error, delete it from your system
    without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender of the error by
    replying via email or by calling Frost Brown Todd LLC at (513) 651-6800
    (collect), so that our address record can be corrected.

    IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements
    imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this
    communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written to
    be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties
    under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or
    recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed
    herein.

    ________________________________



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 17 2009 - 13:30:17 PDT