From: "Anthony Watkinson" <[log in to unmask]> I have refrained from commenting on posts by Fred Friend for some time but I cannot refrain from commenting on this one. Big publishers have absolutely no influence on universities. Big librarians have a huge influence within universities as he knows very well. For example in most universities librarians are the copyright officers whether or not they know anything about copyright. They organise campaigns about transforming scholarly communication even when they are not scholars. Yes of course some academics who are editors of journals published by big publishers (whether for profit or not-for-profit) do not want their journals to be removed from purchase but they are not acting as representatives of big publishers. They are acting as academics. Unfortunately for Fred Friend academics on the ground do not always agree with him. Librarians do not represent academics and of course publishers do not either. I guess few academics would wish to have a model of scholarly communication under which they would always to get money to pay fees to publish. I suggest that most academics whether they prefer to publish in open access journals or not would want the mixed economy that we currently have. Anthony Watkinson University College London -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of FrederickFriend Sent: 17 November 2011 03:17 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Future of the "subscription model?" Bill's contributions to such discussions are always to the point. Some librarians are capable of playing hardball with publishers. The problem I experienced in so doing was that my university authorities and senior academics were not willing to support a "take it or leave it" result from the negotiations. The big publishers have so much influence within universities that they often undermine a tough stance from the library. University authorities do not apply the same criteria of impact and value for money to journal purchases as they would to other expenditure, and senior academics confuse the retention of the really key journals with the occasionally useful titles that all get bundled together in a big deal. Open Access has become far more than a "solution to library budgets". It started in that way for some people, but the more we looked at open access, the more attractive became the benefits to all stakeholders, including some publishers. Fred Friend -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 1:50 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Future of the "subscription model?" Rick this cuts both ways. First, OK, let's concede that a handful of top tier journals are "must have." And so libraries which have researchers in certain fields have to pay through the nose for some - some - of Big Publishings products. But in my 30 years plus in this business, it seems to me libraries have little grasped that Big Publishing needs you, the university library, as much as I (small publisher) do. And while librarians may be adept at saying 'take it or leave it' to the smaller pubishers, the community seems far less capable of doing that to Big Publishing, which has been one of the ways this hugely skewed market has emerged. Few librarians grasp that EXXXXXXX is, for example, our company with a few noughts on the end of the balance sheet. Very recently the library of a large technological university in Europe wanted to acquire 13 of our titles. They wanted a discount, fair enough, so we offered them one. But, in fact, after negotiating, what I was to take or leave was a price some 30% lower than our offer, effectively diminishing over time as the built-in increase was only 2%, i.e., less than inflation. Did I say 'hop it'? Of course not, I'm not going to turn down an order for a few thousand dollars. And is a large publisher going to turn down an order for a few tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, even though it's 30% less than it wanted? Libraries have the willpower and skillset to play hardball with small publishers, but will they apply those talents to their dealings with big publishing? The result is a market so skewed that some people believe complex initiatives like Open Access provide the solution to library budgets. Best wishes Bill Hughes Multi-Science Publishing www.multi-science.co.uk