From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 16:45:52 +0100

My experience is that very few universities still subsidise journal
editorial offices and any time off teaching has to be bought out. Sometimes
this is a really large extra cost.

Anthony

-----Original Message-----
From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 22:02:10 -0500

Isn't it a two-way street? Many societies have editors who are
subsidized by their universities to edit the society's journals by
being given time off from teaching, free office space, the use of
clerical support, etc.  If they choose instead to live by the
(commercial) sword, then they should also be prepared to die by that
sword.  Tying their fates to the whims of commercial businesses
strikes me as even more risky than depending on the budgeting vagaries
of universities.  If those businesses fail, to whom will societies
then turn, having spurned their university connections?

Sandy Thatcher


At 7:29 PM -0400 5/1/12, LIBLICENSE wrote:

> From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 09:19:34 +0100
>
> I was accustomed to make use of this argument when I was Head of Journals
> at OUP. It had resonance but some societies would say they had no interest
in
> subsidising Oxford University.
>
> Anthony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 09:41:10 -0500
>
>>  Remember, it is not only
>>  large commercial publishers in this game, but I know very reputable
>>  large university presses that also play in this space.
>
> Yes, but in the latter case, any surpluses made stay within the
> academic system and can be used to further benefit higher education.
>
> Sandy Thatcher