Re: The Logic of Page Charges to Free the Journal Literature

From: Sally Morris \(ALPSP\) <"Sally>
Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 12:49:21 +0200

I think the report (at
http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/en/images/costs_business_7955.pdf) needs to
be read rather carefully

The cost figures are not new, but make sensible use of previously
published figures (whether or not these have been updated to current
values I am not sure); the separation of 'per submission' and 'per
publication' costs is, I think, particularly valuable.

However, there are two big flaws. The first is that the author compares
a print + electronic subscription journal with an electronic-only open
access journal. Most of the 30% savings identified lie in the
difference between p+e and e-only - as the author says, any savings from
no longer needing to handle and sells subscriptions/licences will be
offset, at least to a degree, by the need for a system to charge
authors. The sources on which the author draws have set the e-only
savings at 20-25%. (Of course, if an OA journal still finds it
necessary to produce a print version, some of these savings will not be
made)

The second flaw is that, despite frequent reminders in the text that the
figures quoted are merely direct per-article costs, and that a figure
must be added (a) for overheads and (b) for profit/surplus, the author
himself fails to do so and quotes his 'cost' figures as being
appropriate for author charges. One actually needs to add some 30% for
overheads and 15% for profit/surplus in order to arrive at a viable
author charge.

Sally Morris, Chief Executive
Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers
South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK

Phone: +44 (0)1903 871686 Fax: +44 (0)1903 871457
E-mail: chief-exec_at_alpsp.org
ALPSP Website http://www.alpsp.org
Received on Wed May 05 2004 - 11:49:21 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:47:27 GMT