As for me, the aim of Gold OA is not to create a genuine marketplace between publishers and authors - especially if this be a marketplace that will always be subject to the shielding of pricing by librarians - but rather to create a genuine space for an open conversation among authors, independently of their access to money.
For this reason, I increasingly feel the author-pay model is flawed and I feel that true Gold OA is and should be gratis for authors and free for readers. Research costs a lot, but is unsustainable if not deeply subsidized, in particular by public money. That has been going on forever (Archimedes burning lenses in Syracuse anyone ?). Publishing is part of doing research: that is why Kepler and Galileo and many others spent so much time writing so many letters. When the communication system of scientists was mechanized through printing, that did not change the status of the documents containing the research results. They were still part of research, except that new skills were needed to produce them. So, let us have these printed documents subsidized as well, and Bob's your uncle... That is the way Latin America is going, and, in Europe, countries that already heavily subsidize journals published by commercial outfits (e.g. Italy, France, Spain, etc.) only have to redirect that money on true Gold ventures. Subsidizing journals published by commercial publishers is simply stupid, not to say more. Subsidizing articles published in hybrid journals is also stupid: it only ensures a double revenue stream for publishers. Subsidizing authors to publish in OA journals is simply a way to promote one's institution or even country within some kind of competitive game, but without reference to the fact that the Grand Conversation of science needs universal access. Let us forget the economic perspective (without forgetting the accounting of real costs) as it tends to make us forget that scientific publishing exists to serve scientists, not the reverse. The exchange of research results should not be interfered with by market considerations. And if one uses the metaphor of "market" for the exchange of ideas, let us remember that it is a metaphor, not a concept. I am afraid that the term "market" pollutes a lot of our discussions nowadays, and not only in the open access arena, alas. Jean-Claude Guédon Le samedi 05 octobre 2013 à 16:12 +0100, Sally Morris a écrit : > Many of you have argued that Gold OA - at last - creates a genuine > marketplace between publishers and authors. In any marketplace, > sellers price according to what they consider their offer is worth to > buyers. Some journals are worth more than others to authors (indeed, > publishers generally follow this principle when pricing subscriptions > - I don't know of any publishers who price all their subscription > journals the same). So what's odd about it? > > Sally > > Sally Morris > South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex, UK BN13 3UU > Tel: +44 (0)1903 871286 > Email: sa...@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On > Behalf Of Dana Roth > Sent: 04 October 2013 20:00 > To: 'Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)' > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Scholars jobs not publisher profits > > > > In defense of Jeffrey Beall the extreme variability of Hindawis > APCs is, at the least, interesting > > especially the large number of free and relatively low priced APCs > for many of their journals. > > http://www.hindawi.com/apc/ > > > Dana L. Roth > Caltech Library 1-32 > 1200 E. California Blvd. Pasadena, CA 91125 > 626-395-6423 fax 626-792-7540 > dzr...@library.caltech.edu > http://library.caltech.edu/collections/chemistry.htm > > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On > Behalf Of David Prosser > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 1:27 AM > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Scholars jobs not publisher profits > > > > Jeffrey > > > > "Ignoratio elenchi"? That's from Harry Potter, right? Spell meaning > 'facts be gone'? > > > > Heather is interested in the flow of money out of academia. If that > is your area of interest then the profit margins of large commercial, > legacy publishers are clearly of more interest than the profit margins > of other players. From the figures I quote (from your blog), Hindawi > takes $300 of profit from each paper it publishers. A large > commercial, legacy publisher takes about $1200*. From where I sit > (and I admit my knowledge of economics is almost as bad as that of > Latin) it is clear that $1200 per paper is a significantly larger > amount than $300 per paper and there is no way the figures back up > your contention that 'It appears that the money is just moving from > one set of publishers to another.' > > > > David > > > > *My conservative guess - happy to have people with access to the > figures correct this. It's basically 30% of $4000 > > > > On 3 Oct 2013, at 23:04, Beall, Jeffrey wrote: > > > > > > > David, > > > > Thank you for your ignoratio elenchi. > > > > --Jeffrey > > > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On > Behalf Of David Prosser > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 3:03 PM > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Scholars jobs not publisher profits > > > > Jeffrey > > > > in the comment section to your post Ahmed Hindawi points out that the > average revenue per paper published by Hindawi is about $600. For > people like Elsevier it is in excess of $4000 per paper. I think it > is clear which publisher is taking (significantly) more money out of > the system. > > > > David > > > > > > > On 3 Oct 2013, at 20:31, Beall, Jeffrey wrote: > > > > > > Heather: > > > > Ive documented that Hindawis profit margin is higher than > Elseviers. So, I am correct in assuming that you include > Hindawi in your advice below, no? Also, its been revealed > that a number of the higher ups at PLOS are drawing salaries > of over a quarter-million dollars a year, and one was even > drawing a salary of over a half-million dollars. It appears > that the money is just moving from one set of publishers to > another. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jeffrey Beall > > > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On > Behalf Of Heather Morrison > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 11:43 AM > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Scholars jobs not publisher profits > > > > My reaction to the EBSCO report on expected ongoing high price > increases by some in the scholarly publishing sector at the > same time that academics at my alma mater have been asked to > consider voluntary severance has been posted to my blog: > > > > http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.ca/2013/10/scholars-lets-keep-our-jobs-and-ditch.html > > > > My conclusion: > > > > It is time for scholars, university administrators and > research funders to wake up and realize that creation of new > knowledge is done by researchers, not publishers. Don't give > up your job or or let your colleagues give up theirs without > demanding that the large commercial scholarly publishers give > up their 30-40% profit margins. > > > > best, > > > > -- > Dr. Heather Morrison > Assistant Professor > École des sciences de l'information / School of Information > Studies > University of Ottawa > > http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html > heather.morri...@uottawa.ca > > ALA Accreditation site visit scheduled for 30 Sept-1 Oct > 2013 / > Visite du comité externe pour l'accréditation par l'ALA est > prévu le 30 > sept-1 oct 2013 > > http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/accreditation.html > http://www.esi.uottawa.ca/accreditation.html > > > > > > <ATT00001..txt> > > > > > <ATT00001..txt> > > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal -- Jean-Claude Guédon Professeur titulaire Littérature comparée Université de Montréal
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
