From: Mark Doyle <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:06:44 -0500

Hi,

It seems to me that the (Gold) OA model scales better with the
increase in total global research output than a subscription model.
Typically one would expect to a region's research output (and funding)
to scale with that region's GDP. This in turn would mean that an
institution's or funding agency's available money for OA APCs (say),
scales with their research output.

However, in the subscription model, library budgets (if they even kept
up with the size of their region's research output/funding, which they
don't!), are very unlikely to scale with the global research output.
For instance, would you expect a U.S. library budget to scale at the
same (high) rate as the research output increase in China?

Publisher's costs naturally scale with the amount of the research they
must peer review and publish. In a Gold OA model, revenue naturally
scales with the number of papers published (assuming acceptance rates
stay more or less constant given the unpopularity of submission fees).
So a 50% increase in research output, would mean a 50% rise in APC
fees collected, with institutions and funding agencies having their
contributions scale with their local increase in output rather than
the overall output of the world.

In the subscription world, a 50% increase would mean shrinking
subscription bases and prices rising much higher than 50% as libraries
fail to keep up with the increasing cost to acquire the world's
research output (this is really just the historic serials crisis in a
nutshell in my view).

Best regards,
Mark

Mark Doyle
Director, Journal Information Systems
American Physical Society

On Nov 28, 2012, at 5:57 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 17:45:13 -0500
>
> I am sure that I am not the only person who has observed that the
> total cost of scholarly material has increased since the advent of
> open access publications.  And it will continue to grow.  Even if it's
> true that OA could cut costs by 15%, what does that mean if research
> increases by 50%?
>
> Joe Esposito
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 5:06 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> From: Richard Poynder <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 08:02:23 +0000
>>
>> “We estimate that a full transition to OA could lead to savings in the
>> region of 10-12% of the cost base of a subscription publisher.”
>>
>> BernsteinResearch investment analyst Claudio Aspesi
>>
>> The key question: If Aspesi's estimate of the potential cost savings
>> provided by a full transition to OA is accurate, would those savings
>> be passed on to the research community if they were achieved?
>>
>> https://plus.google.com/109680188903316748168/posts/ao2BBmwpzHg
>>
>> http://bit.ly/TquCZz
>>
>> Richard Poynder