Re: more on OA Now

[David Goodman <dgoodman@Princeton.EDU>]

Richard,

Let's try some actual arithmetic.

(Like you I am distinguishing cost to the publisher from 
price,which is the amount charged to a library.)

If a journal costs $1000 to produce, and the publisher sells it 
for $1000+40%=$1400, Then if the libraries decide that the most 
profit they will permit is 10%, the price will fall to $1100, not 
$350.

This is a worthwhile savings, but not of the magnitude that it 
might appear; 21% not 75%

I could comment on the legal aspects, but others will do it with 
more authority.

David G

Dr. David Goodman
Associate Professor
Palmer School of Library and Information Science
Long Island University
and formerly
Princeton University Library

dgoodman@liu.edu
dgoodman@princeton.edu

----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Feinman <RFeinman@downstate.edu>
Date: Sunday, April 2, 2006 10:26 am
Subject: more on OA Now
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu

> I am grateful to everybody for pointing out the numerous 
> sources which are much further along than I suspected. 
> Anyway, although others may have said as much, I offer further 
> speculation on coalitions.
>
> First my vision of the outcome is that in the long run, OA will 
> be run by the major publishing houses.  Their reaction to this, 
> however, will be like FDR's description of big business - 
> reaction to policies that he felt had saved business after the 
> depression: having fallen into the ocean in their dress 
> clothes, they were saved from drowning but were furious that 
> their top hats had floated away.
>
> Here is a scenario: the Journal of Example published by Major 
> Press charges a very large subscription fee to libraries. 
> They make an inordinate profit (four times what they make on 
> their other publishing activities).  A coalition of 100 
> academic libraries tells them they will pay one quarter that 
> fee for ten years if the journal is open access plus they will 
> pay additional fees if the library users express interest in a 
> bound volume as well.  The academic editorial board of JoE 
> (also part of the coalition) agree that this makes sense even 
> though a much smaller profit is involved for the publisher. 
> The threat, if they do not agree, is that the editors will jump 
> to a new open access journal, the Example Journal published by 
> Small press that is normally supported by authors' fees.
>
> The coalition of libraries, editors and end-users will support 
> Example J at the new proposed level. The author charges in 
> Example J will be the same as for JoE or dispensed with 
> althogether.  The case will be made to prospective authors of 
> the value of the switch for dissemination of information and 
> preservation of funding for libraries.  The funding sources for 
> the library will support the move and allow the libraries to 
> use the saved money for terminals, printers, etc.  The 
> libraries may be surprised that they are paying for everybody's 
> access but it is still a savings in money pending a global 
> direct solution. Major press may not think that it is 
> worthwhile to take a cut in profits and Small publisher may now 
> have a contender as major journal because the coalition has 
> that power (has the editors and the major workers in the 
> field).
>
> Is it up to the coalition to tell a publisher how much profit 
> they can make?  Well, that is what you do when you decide the 
> actual value of a product and what you are willing to pay for 
> it. The current problem is simply that the end-user is also the 
> reviewer and editor and tied into the marketability of the 
> product, that is, the prestige.  Once the inherent value of the 
> product is what is in competition, prices will be reasonable 
> and OA will be the obvious if not necessarily unique means of 
> production. Of course, at some point, one will ask what do we 
> need the library for? At that point, funding agencies will 
> realize that they are funding expertise of staff and 
> availability of terminals, etc., and indirectly a system that 
> provides information for everybody.  At this point a new 
> coalition between government, universities and end-users will 
> find a global systematic solution.
>
> So the question is whether the big publishers can anticipate 
> change and offer contracts with reasonable prices to maintain 
> open access.  Will it have to be done by a coalition isolating 
> target journals and bringing about change by adversarial 
> actions? When can we start on this?
>
> Richard D. Feinman, Professor of Biochemistry
k