We are facing a profound change in scholarly communication. A digital scholarly information system has been evolving over the last decade and the potential for radically changing the way scholars, publishers and libraries function is remarkable. There are now thousands of journals available online, yet the distribution patterns are immature. In fact it is almost an oxymoron to describe the distribution as a pattern at all. It seems as if every electronic product is licensed, acquired, and made available in a unique way. Librarians struggle with the seemingly impossible task of creating procedures and workflows. In an address given at the ALCTS Business of Acquisitions Advanced Institute: Rethinking and Transforming Acquisitions, Clifford Lynch outlined the challenges that we face as we try to represent our institution’s interests in the digital distribution system. First of all, there are few consensus answers; no “benchmarks” or “best practices” have emerged. Secondly, the acquisitions framework maps poorly into existing structures. ¹ The linear model for the acquisition of print titles (collection development-acquisitions-vendor-publisher-acquisitions-cataloging-shelf-end user) is unsuited to the digital environment. Too much information needs to flow in too many directions. To the question of who or what unit in the library needs to be involved in the decision making, the answer seems to be: “Everybody!” At times it almost appears to be a three-ring circus. Those of us who have called publishers to clarify a point of price, licensing, or mode of access have found a three-ring circus at the other end too. In response to this complexity we are seeing the emergence of specialists in the acquisition of electronic resources.