Eric,
You talk about "market-distorting practices". The biggest market-distorting
factor in a subscription/licence model is of course that the party who pays is
not the party who choses (at least 'gold' models put the choice in the hands of
those who can sensibly choose: the authors). The quest
Jan:
I agree with almost everything you say. I'd only quibble with the statement
about the Big Deal, but that is a concept from the past.
In particular, the unbundling of journals is definitely something to
pursue. I hope altmetrics and OA accelerate that trend.
--Eric.
--Eric.
http://scitechsoci
ailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf
Of Jan Velterop
Sent: Thursday, 4 July 2013 6:15 PM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Hybrid OA/subscription journals
Eric,
You talk about "market-distorting practices". The biggest market-distorting
fact
I'll leave it to others to reply to the many questionable details below.
Let me just say that "double-dipping," is not motive term but a very clear,
objective one (though it might well give rise to some emotions!): It means
being paid twice for the same product.
And that's precisely what happens w
Jan:
I agree with you that pricing journals for a publisher is complicated, at
least when looking from the inside out. But that is no different from any
other supplier of a product. The problem with the academic journal market
is price transparency.
With Hybrid Gold OA publishers essentially tell
