Re: Gold OA funds as generalised "subvention funds"?

[Joseph Esposito <espositoj@gmail.com>]

Richard,

This is great.  Let's do it.  But let's not pretend.

My point was simple:  you cannot pay for OA with POD if you take=20
a view of the publishing environment that extends out beyond a=20
couple years.

You can, on the other hand, subsidize OA publishing.  You can do=20
that by having authors or their departments pay for publication=20
or by bringing in grants.  Nothing wrong with that.

My objection is to the idea that OA is without cost.  POD is=20
simply wonderful for many things, but it does not provide a=20
long-term method for financing OA publications.

As for the comment elsewhere on this thread about the housewife=20
who reads romances, first, let me make clear that that example=20
did not come from the mouth of PC me.  But more importantly, the=20
demographics of purchase for the Amazon Kindle skew old.  The=20
Kindle is an outstanding reading device for people who don't want=20
the glare of a backlit screen (e.g., iPad), whether they are=20
housewives are high energy physicists (or they could be both at=20
the same time).  It supports fonts up to 18 pt., the definition=20
of Large Type.

But if you follow the trade press, you will see that $150 readers=20
will be on the market this fall.  I expect to see $50 readers in=20
a year or two. They will link to large online bookstores with=20
files in the ePub format, the format that publishers have agreed=20
to support as a standard.

POD is an outstanding transitional technology.  The transition=20
will be significantly accomplished in just a few years.

Joe Esposito

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Richard Poynder
<richard.poynder@gmail.com> wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
> [mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Joseph Esposito
> Sent: 05 June 2010 01:05
> To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
> Subject: Re: Interview w/Sarah Pritchard, Univ. librarian, Northwestern U=
=2E
>
> Joe Esposito wrote:
>
> Make the text free online and sell the print version? =C2=A0How long
> will that tactic last? =C2=A0Is no one in the OA world paying
> attention to what is happening with the Amazon Kindle, the Apple
> iPad, and even the Barnes & Noble Nook? =C2=A0And the gorilla has not
> yet entered the market: Google Editions, due probably in July.
> Book professionals are now forecasting that in five years, 25% of
> the book market will be electronic. How can anyone expect to sell
> print under these circumstances? =C2=A0Is the academy the only segment
> of the society that does NOT believe that books are going
> digital?
>
> Please, test this for yourself. Buy an iPad, put 3-4 books on it,
> and then tell me what this will do to your future consumption of
> print.
>
> Whatever the virtues of OA, financing it through anticipated
> print sales is not a long-term strategy.
>
> ***
>
> Richard Poynder Replies:
>
> Personally I remain agnostic on this issue.
>
> But perhaps a more salient point made by Sarah Pritchard in the
> Information Today interview is that university presses -
> particularly those focused on the humanities - invariably have to
> be subsidised in order to be able to carry on publishing. In this
> regard Sarah Pritchard makes an interesting suggestion about the
> use of the so-called Gold OA funds that are being created at a
> growing number of universities
> (http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/OA_journal_funds).
>
> Her suggestion is that these funds should be used not just to
> support author-pays OA, but as more generalised "subvention
> funds". As she puts it, "[T]he model I see is one in which you
> have a pool of money that can be considered research funds. These
> funds might be used for page charges in a commercial subscription
> journal, they might be used as a subvention for a university
> press, or they might be used to pay OA charges. All three of
> those things are basically undergirding the same process: getting
> the material out there."
>
> http://www.infotoday.com/it/jun10/Poynder.shtml
>
> Richard Poynder
---2071850956-1087241609-1276031776=:7687--