Re: [Videolib] videolib Digest, Vol 24, Issue 69

From: Lawrence Daressa <LD@newsreel.org>
Date: Thu Nov 12 2009 - 10:56:33 PST

I'm a bit puzzled by Gary's statement that "the number of users has
nothing to do with ANYTHING." In almost any other context, the number of
users would seem to have everything to do with everything eg. i-Tune or
Blockbuster rentals, Kindle downloads, textbook purchases, car rentals,
MRI scans, hotel rooms, you name it. Potential users of a product
constitute the market; market share constitutes the percentage of those
who pay for its use. Distributors and users "negotiate" a price point
which both maximizes use and maximizes revenues. This is basic
economics.

I have suggested a number of reimbursement models based on this
principle of pay-per-use. The use of FTE numbers, budget size, etc to
determine price are simply imprecise approximations of the correleation
between price and use. Digital rental, individual, vouchered or by
subscription, are ways to make this connection more directly.

Perhaps libraries will need to restrict their function to preservation
and reference rather than the provision of core instructional materials,
I have suggested that DVDs or digital files be made available for these
restricted uses at rates comparable to reference works and scholarly
monographs. Such an arrangement would both allow libraries to develop
comprehensive video collections of work which could be accomodated by a
single copy for individual use and at the same time allow distributors
to be paid for frequently used work based on actual student use.

I do not understand why it is unacceptable to expect students (or
universities, if they choose) to pay for moving image content on the
same basis they pay for textbooks, assigned reading, tuition, gym fees,
credit hours, cell phone service, theatre tickets, etc - that is, pay
per use.I suspect that this media/print anomaly is an artifact of the
16mm days when films cost $600 and could only be viewed with an
expensive projector and (reasonably skilled) projectionist. Moving image
content is now as accessible and affordable as academic texts.

When I was in college much of this was included in the cost of tuition
(which itself was often covered by full scholarships not student loans)
but declining public support for higher education has resulted in
shifting these costs increasingly onto students. Unfortunately, media
distributors cannot be expected to be the exception to this pernicious
but pervasive "privatization" of educational resoures. Video librarians
and distributors need to work together to adopt to these new economic
realities - or we could always form a social democratic party, though I
suspect our political prowess is not up to the task.

Larry.

-----Original Message-----
From: videolib-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu
[mailto:videolib-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of
videolib-request@lists.berkeley.edu
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 8:44 AM
To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Subject: videolib Digest, Vol 24, Issue 69

Send videolib mailing list submissions to
        videolib@lists.berkeley.edu

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        
https://calmail.berkeley.edu/manage/list/listinfo/videolib@lists.berkele
y.edu

or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        videolib-request@lists.berkeley.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
        videolib-owner@lists.berkeley.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of videolib digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Tiered Pricing (Susan Albrecht)
   2. Re: Tiered Pricing (ghandman@library.berkeley.edu)
   3. Re: A meditation on indie vdeo pricing in an age of
      fiscalapocalypse (Jessica Rosner)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:32:11 -0500
From: Susan Albrecht <albrechs@wabash.edu>
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Tiered Pricing
To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20091112112734.0209b540@wabash.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I certainly would be, Jonathan, since we're even slightly smaller than
Eileen's institution. In fact, one of the best things that came out of
NMM for me this year was having one of the vendors, whose stuff we
really like, offer to place us at the community college/high school
pricing level even though we're a 4-year college. I wish more vendors
would look at the issue this way, because to lump a small college in
with a large university seems to me patently unfair. We're definitely
not in the group Gary says doesn't think anything over $20 is worth
buying -- I *love* buying high-quality, well-made indie titles -- but
when my small-institution-sized budget has to pay out the same amount
for a title as a 15-30K university, it's very hard to buy all I'd like.

Susan

At 10:54 AM 11/12/2009, you wrote:
>Dear Eileen
>
>Interesting: would it be ok with everyone if we set our prices for DVDs

>on the basis of Carnegie Classifications? And if Lake Forest, for
>example, paid $250 for a DVD w/ PPR while Gary paid $400?
>
>I might be ok with that. who else would be?
>
>JM
>
>
>Jonathan Miller
>President
>Icarus Films
>32 Court Street, 21st Floor
>Brooklyn, NY 11201 USA
>
>tel 1.718.488.8900
>fax 1.718.488.8642
>www.IcarusFilms.com
>jmiller@IcarusFilms.com
>
>
>
>
>----------
>From: videolib-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu
>[mailto:videolib-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Karsten,
>Eileen
>Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 10:50 AM
>To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
>Subject: Re: [Videolib] Tiered Pricing
>
>I am not a big fan of tiered pricing and paying for PPR rights that I
>do not need. My main objection to tiered pricing is that it is not
>based on number of potential users. Right now my institution with a
>potential of 1200 users pays the same as a university with a potential
>of 10,000 users. Also, we are paying more than the local
>public library that has 5,000 potential users. If filmmakers
>borrowed their pricing structure from the serial world, I would find it

>more defensible than the current structure. I know this will not help
>Gary's budget or make more public libraries interested in these films,
>but it would make easier for some of us smaller libraries to defend
>purchases to our administrators.
>
>
>Eileen Karsten
>Head of Technical Services
>Donnelley and Lee Library
>Lake Forest College
>555 N. Sheridan Road
>Lake Forest, IL 60045
>karsten@lakeforest.edu
>
>
>----------
>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.

Susan Albrecht
Acquisitions Manager
Wabash College Lilly Library
Crawfordsville, IN
x6216
albrechs@wabash.edu

************************************************************************
*********
"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."--Neil Peart
************************************************************************
*********

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment scrubbed and removed.
HTML attachments are only available in MIME digests.

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:33:58 -0800
From: ghandman@library.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [Videolib] Tiered Pricing
To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Message-ID:
        <e8430b8aaf0a341dd439cffe3379b5da.squirrel@calmail.berkeley.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8

Number of users has nothing to do with ANYTHING, Eileen. The issue is
really market share. The issue of audience size is really just an excuse
to charge all the market will bear. (OK, distributor friends, bring it
on...)

In the case of indie (i.e. non-home video) titles, the number of
potential viewers has no relation whatsoever to potential SALES or
revenue. There seems to be this strange, implicit notion that since a
large numbers of viewers in an institution can view a single copy sold
to that institution for free over time, the price should be pegged to
the audience size or other institutional metrics. That's simply BS.
It's not as if anyone (including faculty)would otherwise run out an buy
a personal copy at 300 bucks. The bottom line is that differential
(tiered) pricing is done because market has been willing to support it.
Times are changing...

There's simply got to be another model.

Gary

> I am not a big fan of tiered pricing and paying for PPR rights that I
> do not need. My main objection to tiered pricing is that it is not
> based on number of potential users. Right now my institution with a
> potential of 1200 users pays the same as a university with a potential
of 10,000 users.
> Also, we are paying more than the local public library that has 5,000
> potential users. If filmmakers borrowed their pricing structure from
the
> serial world, I would find it more defensible than the current
structure.
> I know this will not help Gary's budget or make more public libraries
> interested in these films, but it would make easier for some of us
> smaller libraries to defend purchases to our administrators.
>
>
> Eileen Karsten
> Head of Technical Services
> Donnelley and Lee Library
> Lake Forest College
> 555 N. Sheridan Road
> Lake Forest, IL 60045
> karsten@lakeforest.edu
>
> ________________________________
> 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.
>

Gary Handman
Director
Media Resources Center
Moffitt Library
UC Berkeley

510-643-8566
ghandman@library.berkeley.edu
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC

"I have always preferred the reflection of life to life itself."
--Francois Truffaut

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:44:22 -0500
From: Jessica Rosner <maddux2014@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Videolib] A meditation on indie vdeo pricing in an age
        of fiscalapocalypse
To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
Message-ID:
        <55e0d0090911120844t7e720bfega9d02cb67684e90e@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"

ah but there's the rub "hot topics and more popular subjects" are
generally a fraction of what many educational companies sell. For every
Before Stonewall or Life and Debt there are hundreds of smaller
documentaries many of which are not even features. I agree that there
definitely are titles in the higher priced catalogues that could sell
enough copies at retail pricing to survive but not a lot. Once you go to
retail pricing you are inevitably have to use wholesalers to get the
title in the hands of Midwest Tape, Amazon , Netflx etc so you are
going from $295 to about $12.50 and that means you have to sell a hell
of lot of more copies. I think the understandable resentment over
multi-tiered pricing and claims by some that PPR rights are needed or
used by most libraries is being taken out on genuinely important but
less "popular" films which simply have no chance at wide sales. Again I
don't have a solution but if it were as easy as suddenly putting out
documentaries on Bolivian food co-ops or how IMF policies effect water
systems in Turkey on Amazon and selling 1000 copies I assure you
filmmakers would have done this.

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Moshiri, Farhad <moshiri@uiwtx.edu>
wrote:

> As I mentioned yesterday, It is hard for me to accept that out of
> thousands higher education institutions, several hundred don?t buy
> documentaries with home version pricing. We buy a lot First Run, Kino,

> Zeitgeist, PBS, etc. If you check the WorldCat, you?ll see that First

> Run?s two documentaries: Before and After Stonewall is owned by more
> than 300 libraries. Most of the time that I check videos priced more
> than $300 I see the number of libraries that own them is less than 10!

> Anytime I bring up this issue, the response from the producers and
> distributers are examples of very obscure subjects to prove that no
> one buys them even if they are priced less than a $100. I don?t argue
> with that. But there are video recordings on hot topics and more
> popular subjects that I?m sure many libraries are willing to buy if
they?re priced reasonably.
>
>
>
> Farhad Moshiri
>
> AV Librarian
>
> University of the Incarnate Word
>
> San Antonio, TX
>
>
>
> *From:* videolib-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:
> videolib-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu] *On Behalf Of *Jessica Rosner
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 12, 2009 8:23 AM
>
> *To:* videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [Videolib] A meditation on indie vdeo pricing in an age

> of fiscalapocalypse
>
>
>
> Unfortunately Gary almost all public libraries think anything over $20

> is too much and many of them are locked into dealing only with
> approved wholesalers. Since the vast majority of the public library
> market will basically never buy small documentaries the way they buy
> popular entertainment films, filmmakers by necessity charge higher
> prices to survive. Like I said it was my FANTASY that public libraries

> would buy these films which would actually enable them to be sold at
> much lower prices. If anyone out there has the magic formula for how
> small documentary films could sell ten times as many copies so the
> prices could lowered to retail level I am anxious to hear it.
>
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:26 AM, <ghandman@library.berkeley.edu>
wrote:
>
> Don't buy now but would if cheaper...Nah. These would be the
> libraries that think anything over 20 bucks is too much to spend on
video.
>
> g
>
>
>
>
> > But the question really isn't whether you might buy more films
> > (twice as many even tho your budget gets cut?) but whether more
> > people who don't currently buy from us will start doing so, isn't
it?
> >
> > Jm
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Nov 11, 2009, at 9:04 PM, ghandman@library.berkeley.edu wrote:
> >
> >> Jon:
> >>
> >> You drop your prices to 100 bucks a pop and I guarantee I'll buy
more.
> >> Why? It's less risky. Look: 90% of the stuff I buy I buy because

> >> I think that a) it's worthwhile and interesting and enriches my
> >> collection for the long term b) I can persuade a faculty colleague

> >> into using such (In a collection as large as mine, fewer and fewer
> >> requests come across from faculty) I pay 300 bucks and the title
> >> gets used zip in ten years (happens more than I'd like to admit) I
> >> beat myself up. I take a chance for 100 bucks--far different
> >> thing. The fewer the available bucks, the less I'm willing to take

> >> risks. Simple as that.
> >>
> >> Gary Handman
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Dear video-ists
> >>>
> >>> 1) If amongst say the top 1000 higher=ed media buyers price per se

> >>> was not the obstacle to buying important (say the top 25% of
> >>> released
> >>> titles?)
> >>> documentaries at prices between say $200 and $400,
> >>>
> >>> And now, with reduced budgets there is less ability to continue
> >>> buying them
> >>> - overall.
> >>>
> >>> Then, if distributors who formerly sold at $200-$400 were to cut
> >>> prices to say $100
> >>>
> >>> Why should we expect any more of those 1000 top buyers to buy 2 >
> >>> 4 x as many (at least) units? I don't get it. If I sold 200 units
> >>> at $300 = $ 60,000 / now I am going to release the same films for
> >>> say $150 - will now 400 colleges buy that same title? And even if
> >>> they do, I am still behind (higher costs, more work).
> >>>
> >>> 2) How many of you are using or getting your profs/students to use

> >>> services such as
> >>>
> >>> A) Amazon VOD
> >>> B) New Day VOD
> >>>
> >>> Could we get say 30,000 students to pay $2 each for say our recent

> >>> release on the mortgage crisis WE ALL FALL DOWN? (if we stream it
> >>> ourselves and keep all the money, less the 3% credit card fee!) or

> >>> 70,000 students (!) if it is done thru a 3rd party service like
> >>> Amazon?
> >>>
> >>> 3) Is Alexander Street's model a good substitute for you? Would
> >>> you like to move in that direction?
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps, Gary et al, you can give us some specific commentary on
> >>> which companies / policies that you see starting to emerge do you
> >>> think might work? What are some companies doing right
> >>> (Strategically) as you see it?
> >>> What companies are moving in the wrong direction, and why.
> >>>
> >>> Otherwise, apart from closing up shop, I am not sure what you are
> >>> suggesting we (distributors/ producers) do.
> >>>
> >>> Is that too harsh?
> >>>
> >>> JM
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Jonathan Miller
> >>> President
> >>> Icarus Films
> >>> 32 Court Street, 21st Floor
> >>> Brooklyn, NY 11201 USA
> >>>
> >>> tel 1.718.488.8900
> >>> fax 1.718.488.8642
> >>> www.IcarusFilms.com
> >>> jmiller@IcarusFilms.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: videolib-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu
> >>> [mailto:videolib-bounces@lists.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of
> >>> ghandman@library.berkeley.edu
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 6:35 PM
> >>> To: videolib@lists.berkeley.edu
> >>> Subject: [Videolib] A meditation on indie vdeo pricing in an age
> >>> of fiscalapocalypse
> >>>
> >>> Hi all
> >>>
> >>> I've been mulling over the spate of recent posts re tiered
> >>> pricing, etc.
> >>> Mulling and stewing (sorta sounds like holiday dinner, don't it?)
> >>> In any case, I had a long and rambling post all ready to go
> >>> yesterday, then pulled my punches, went home, had a drink, slept
> >>> on it, and now I think I'm ready to put this out again for
> >>> discussion.
> >>>
> >>> Over the course of the 25 years or so I've been doing this job,
> >>> I've consistently stood firmly and vocally behind the pricing
> >>> structures (including tiered pricing) of our friends in indie
> >>> filmmaking and film distribution--the $200 to $400 sticker prices
> >>> that have become common for the purchase of their wares by higher
> >>> ed institutions. Like my colleagues in other libraries, I've paid

> >>> these prices because, well, to quote Woody Allen, "We need the
> >>> eggs." In other words, my colleagues and I have coughed up
> >>> because: a) we understand the fiscal travails and the slim
> >>> profits of indie film distribution b) we esteem the films being
> >>> sold in this market and realize that diverse collections depend on

> >>> the vitality of the makers and distributors of this stuff c) we've

> >>> had budgets which, to a greater or lesser extent, have afforded us

> >>> the luxury of buying non-mass marketed titles.
> >>>
> >>> Fast forward to 2009...Not to beat an already hemorrhaging horse,
> >>> but, for those of us in higher ed, the woods are burning, and (to
> >>> mix metaphors
> >>> shamelessly) the center can no longer hold (things, in other
> >>> words, are falling apart). My budget this year took a 25% cut; I
> >>> no longer have a supplies and equipment budget of any kind (not to

> >>> mention the fact that I've been furloughed for 21 days). We've
> >>> been promised that next year will be even worse. Now, California
> >>> is an extreme case (as always), but not totally unique, by any
> >>> means. I think that most of my colleagues in academic libraries
> >>> are in roughly the same position in terms of dwindling collection
> >>> budgets...
> >>>
> >>> In this fiscal climate, it seems to me that survival on both the
> >>> buyer and seller ends of things is going to require some serious
> >>> rethinking of the pricing and marketing models that have been in
> >>> place since the inception of home video technologies. The
> >>> "all-the-particular-market-will-bear"
> >>> strategy may very well be a coffin nail for indie distributors in
> >>> the future.
> >>>
> >>> I have most definitely had to think twice about buying the kinds
> >>> of stuff that I wouldn't have blinked about buying in the
> >>> past...and, as much as it pains me to the quick to have to bargain

> >>> shop, home video is looking more
> >>> and more attractive. Again...I think we're definitely not in
> >>> business as
> >>> usual territory any longer, Toto. As stewards of strapped
> >>> collection
> >>> budgets, I think we're all forced to be more hard-nosed and
> >>> realistic about the relative short- and long-term value of what
> >>> we're buying for these collections.
> >>>
> >>> It occurs to me that a number of distributors I know out there
> >>> have, in fact, recranked prices, sought out home video markets,
> >>> tried other pricing structures. It's obvious to me, in any case,
> >>> that historical models just don't cut it in a lot of ways. Is it
> >>> justifiable to charge $300 for a title that's been in a
> >>> distributor's catalog for 10 years...I personally think not. In
> >>> this climate, am I justified in buying $300-a-pop materials "just
> >>> in case" they may be used by teachers and scholars sometime down
the
> >>> road...I'm no longer sure. Can I continue to simply grin and
bear
> >>> the
> >>> fact that public libraries are charged a third of what I pay,
> >>> particularly when this pricing is built almost exclusively on the
> >>> perception that I have the dough and they don't...well, no, I
> >>> can't.
> >>>
> >>> I find it really odious to have to bring this stuff up. I am an
> >>> enormous fan of the distributors that I deal with daily and want
> >>> to see them live long and prosper... On the other hand...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Gary Handman
> >>> Director
> >>> Media Resources Center
> >>> Moffitt Library
> >>> UC Berkeley
> >>>
> >>> 510-643-8566
> >>> ghandman@library.berkeley.edu
> >>> http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC
> >>>
> >>> "I have always preferred the reflection of life to life itself."
> >>> --Francois Truffaut
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 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.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Gary Handman
> >> Director
> >> Media Resources Center
> >> Moffitt Library
> >> UC Berkeley
> >>
> >> 510-643-8566
> >> ghandman@library.berkeley.edu
> >> http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC
> >>
> >> "I have always preferred the reflection of life to life itself."
> >> --Francois Truffaut
> >>
> >>
> >> 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.
> >
>
>
> Gary Handman
> Director
> Media Resources Center
> Moffitt Library
> UC Berkeley
>
> 510-643-8566
> ghandman@library.berkeley.edu
> http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC
>
> "I have always preferred the reflection of life to life itself."
> --Francois Truffaut
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential or
> contain privileged information and are intended solely for the use of
> the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please be advised that you have received this
> email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing,
> or copying of this email and any attachments is strictly prohibited.
> If you have received this email in error, please immediately delete
> the email and any attachments from your system and notify the sender.
Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
> Thank you for your compliance.
>
> 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.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment scrubbed and removed.
HTML attachments are only available in MIME digests.

End of videolib Digest, Vol 24, Issue 69
****************************************

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.
Received on Thu Nov 12 10:56:25 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 07 2010 - 15:16:25 PDT