[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OA economics & libraries
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: OA economics & libraries
- From: Sandy Thatcher <sandy.thatcher@alumni.princeton.edu>
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:45:13 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
I expect that, besides Sage, there will be others taking up the PLoS model soon. That will be the path to the diamond mine.... As for commercial publishers' business savvy, maybe I have just talked to more STM publishers than David has? (I also work part-time now for a commercial publisher, Lynne Rienner, and she is as savvy as they come!) Sandy Thatcher At 8:25 PM -0400 10/25/11, David Prosser wrote: >A couple of points in reply to Sandy's first paragraph. > >The first is on costs. A detailed piece of economic modelling >(see below for link) showed that Gold OA would be cheaper for the >UK (as a publication-heavy country) if the average price for >publication was less than about 2000 pounds. Interestingly, 2000 >pounds is significantly higher than the fee charged by most >successful OA publishers and journals (BMC, Hindarwi, PLoS, New >Journal of Physics, etc) and about the level of the most >unsuccessful OA publishers (mainly hybrid options from larger >publishers - and here I use 'successful' as meaning attracting >authors and revenues to the publisher). So certainly at this >stage and based on the modelling done it would look as if a move >to OA would save money - at least for the UK. > >The second is on publisher flexibility. I do not recognise the >picture of flexible, rapidly reactive large commercial publishers >rushing to embrace Gold OA. Let's take Elsevier. They have a >hybrid model with very low take-up (they tell us) - I assume >partly because it is priced to defend revenues, not attracted >authors. They have a tiny number of actual open access journals. >There is no gold rush there. Of the large publishers only >Springer (a private equity company) appears to have embraced OA, >having purchased BMC and now using that experience as a >spring-board to launch a number of new OA titles. And perhaps >Nature as one of the smaller companies (although it is part of a >much larger group). > >Where Sandy sees commercial publishers as being quick on their >feet, I see feet dragging. And why is that? Well, if you were >sitting on a diamond mine providing over 30% profits what would >your reaction be to somebody who came and said 'Have I got a deal >for you - get rid of your diamond mine and take up this great >gold mine. I can give you, say, 20% profits'? Any chief >executive who took that proposition to their shareholders would >be quickly looking for a new job! > >David
- Prev by Date: Re: Hathi Orphans?
- Next by Date: Re: OA economics & libraries
- Previous by thread: Re: OA economics & libraries
- Next by thread: Re: OA economics & libraries
- Index(es):