RE: No interest in efficiency???

[Jan Velterop <velterop@biomedcentral.com>]

Joe Esposito wrote:

> As for the use of the word "monopoly", well, the term is more 
> meaningfully applied to a business, not a product.  The competition in 
> publishing largely takes place at the time of product acquisition (what 
> journals should we publish?  how do we get the best editors?), and at 
> that point the competition is simply brutal.  A "product monopoly" is 
> really a misnomer. I suppose the coffee cup on my desk is a monopoly 
> of sorts, as only I get to use it.

Joe is right, competition for papers is 'brutal'. But it has no economic
feedback mechanism because the authors and editors are simply not (nor do
they have to be in the old model) aware of costs. Payment from research
funds, as in open access publishing, involves authors, and restores market
feedback and the pressure for price moderation and efficiency gains that
come with it.

The cup of coffee holds no water. Well, metaphorically not in any case.
There are plenty of purveyors of equally good coffee in most places.

> But the proof is in the pudding:  If "defeatured" publications are what
> the marketplace really wants, publish some.  See what happens.  We read 
> so much today about how inexpensive it is to publish journals, were it 
> not for the ham-fisted, greedy ignoramuses who run publishing companies, 
> that we should all simply run out, start our own journals, and show 
> John Wiley how it should be done.

Sort of what we're doing at BioMed Central, with growing success.

Jan Velterop
www.biomedcentral.com