Online/Digital version of the 18th Edition od BS7671

[JohnW2]

could it be because they like spreading anti-EU stories?

They undoubtedly do, but the 'story' (announcement) to which I linked was surely an essentially pro-EU (or, at least anti-[anti-EU]) one, wasn't it?

I still wonder if you are perhaps thinking/talking about something other than the announcement to which I linked.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The IET electronic version of BS7671 is a different product. It is a year's rental of BS7671 plus other documents. The paper version is yours to keep. Electronic versions are generally cheaper to reflect the lower cost of distribution, anyway.

And £66 per year is a true reflection of the cost of providing access to an electronic version of BS 7671?

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

It is a true reflection of what they think they can screw out of people. I'm not supporting it. I hate DRM.

 

[JohnW2]

The yearly subscription is not just to cover the cost of 'providing electronic access' any more than the cost of the printed version is just to cover the cost of the paper.
To give people who have already purchased a paper copy access to an electronic version for little/no cost would be a different matter (that happens, for example, with lots of journals etc.) - but that's not what we are talking about.

 

[flameport]

It's a comparable price to the paper versions, to buy BS7671, the OSG, GN1 and GN3 in paper form is about £200, and they might be good for 3 years before new versions are printed.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Indeed.

But the cost of providing electronic copies is orders of magnitude less than providing paper copies, so why is the price not orders of magnitude less?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

...any more than the cost of the printed version is just to cover the cost of the paper.

Then what is it for?

 

[JohnW2]

That cannot be a serious question.

 

[JohnD]

That cannot be a serious question.

no, it can't.

Type "B" pricing is related to what the customer is willing to pay, enabling you to work from the price high enough to maximise income, and the price low enough to maximise sales, and the point which maximises profit.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

That cannot be a serious question.

It is very serious.

Please note, before contributing any further comments, or asking any further questions, that my position is firmly that BS 7671 is a national standard, of quasi-legal levels of enforceability, not a for-profit work.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Type "B" pricing is related to what the customer is willing to pay

Unacceptable in the context of a National standard with quasi-legal levels of enforceability.

enabling you to work from the price high enough to maximise income, and the price low enough to maximise sales, and the point which maximises profit.

What has profit got to do with it?

 

[JohnW2]

The question of whether British Standards should be free, provided 'at cost' or sold at a profit is a separate issue.
The actual cost of printing a paper copy of a document of a few hundred pages is, today, fairly trivial - so, even if the cost of providing access to an electronic copy is 'orders of magnitude less', the difference between the actual cost of making paper or electronic copies available would also be fairly trivial. So long as the selling price of the paper copy is (for whatever reason) the printing cost +£X (which is roughly £X in total, since that represents such a high proportion of the selling price), I see no logical reason why the price of an electronic copy should not also be roughly £X.
As above, the argument that £X should be very much lower, maybe even zero, is a separate one, but not one which I think should differ between paper and electronic copies - the cost of which therefore ought to be fairly similar (however high or low).

 

[SimonH2]

I agree, the actual cost pf printing (in the sort of volumes they will be doing) is fairly low, but distribution etc soon adds significantly to that.

I think what BAS is missing is the element of the sale price paying for the cost of producing the content in the first place. Ie, you are not just paying for a stack of papers with some ink on, or an electronic equivalent - you are paying for a significant amount of technical content which did cost serious amounts of cash to produce.

Now, the question of whether it's morally justifiable to impose the cost they do as effectively a legally mandated cost of being in business - well that's a different matter. But BS7671 is only one of many costs that are legally imposed on businesses, so it's hardly an exception.

 

[JohnW2]

I think what BAS is missing is the element of the sale price paying for the cost of producing the content in the first place. Ie, you are not just paying for a stack of papers with some ink on, or an electronic equivalent - you are paying for a significant amount of technical content which did cost serious amounts of cash to produce.

Indeed, but I think his point (with which I have appreciable sympathy) is that BS 7671 is 'almost legislation' (in the sense that, for the vast majority of people concerned, it is the only 'set of regulations' available to them, compliance with which will effectively be taken as a demonstration of compliance with the {totally vague/brief} legislation - Part P of the Building Regs) - and that if it actually were legislation (rather than 'almost legislation') it would be available/accessible to everyone at no cost.

Kind Regards, John

 

[SimonH2]

I hadn't missed that, but it's far from being the only mandatory expense. For example, for someone doing gas work they are required to join Gas Safe which is a private company.