From: Frederick Friend <[log in to unmask]> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 11:02:44 +0000 Dear Joe, Fair comment, and I would say that eLife is also making a pitch to secure a powerful position in the biomed OA journal market. And my point about Sage was not intended as a criticism. It is just part of the reality in the current world of change. With best wishes, Fred Friend -----Original Message----- From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]> Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 17:52:56 -0500 I'm curious, Fred: When eLife announced that it would be waiving its authors' charges for the time being, was that also "an early grab for authors"? I recall cheering and only cheering when eLife was announced and its early plans revealed. Is Sage being held to a different standard? Joe Esposito On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:43 AM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > From: Frederick Friend <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 10:03:58 +0000 > > I echo Nathan Hosburgh's note of caution about this move by Sage. As > well as the points Nathan makes, we must remember that publishers are > competing for market share, especially at a time of change in the > market. To me the $99 offer reads like a traditional loss-leader to > make an early grab for authors and establish Sage Open's position in > this market. Obviously we would all like to see competition in the > level of APCs but I shall be very surprised if $99 sets a standard or > is maintained for more than a year or so. > > Fred Friend > Honorary Director Scholarly Communication UCL > http://www.friendofopenaccess.org.uk > > -----Original Message----- From: Hosburgh, Nathan > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 1:02 > Subject: RE: Sage Open price now $99 > > Regarding the comparison with PLOS: > > - PLOS charges an author fee of $1,350 > - they offer partial/full fee waivers in certain circumstances > - they are a non-profit and their main revenue source is from publication fees > > http://blogs.plos.org/everyone/authors/ > > Sage is a for-profit publisher and I imagine their main revenue source > is subscriptions. Sage Open is one OA journal from a publisher of > many non-OA journals. Sage publishes more than 700 journals spanning > the Humanities, Social Sciences, and Science, Technology, and > Medicine. Only a few of these journal titles appear to be full Gold > OA. Sage offers 'Sage Choice', an OA option for authors who wish to > make their research articles freely available upon publication - this > appears to be available for any Sage journal. > > "For the majority of journals published by SAGE the fee per article is > $3,000USD/£1600GPB in Science, Technology and Medical fields, and > $1,500/£800 in the Humanities and Social Sciences." > http://www.uk.sagepub.com/sagechoice.sp > > So, it seems Sage is extending this one OA journal with very > reasonable publishing fees as a sign of goodwill/PR tool. The $3,000 > article fee would probably be a better comparison with the $1,350 > charged by PLOS since they publish STM material. > > Regardless, this is interesting news - thanks for posting. > > Nate > > Nathan Hosburgh > Electronic Resources Librarian > Assistant Professor > Montana State University Library > Bozeman, MT 59717-3320 > [log in to unmask] > > -----Original Message----- > From: Heather Morrison [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:42 AM > > Sage Open has reduced their open access article processing fee to $99 > per article. The announcement is posted here: > http://www.uk.sagepub.com/aboutus/press/2013/jan/24_jan.htm > > This is not the first OA publisher to come out with prices in this > range. PeerJ, established by Peter Binfield (formerly PLoS ONE), has > open access fees on a lifetime membership basis starting from $99. > > This raises some interesting questions. For example: > > What is the real cost of publishing in an open access online > environment? Sage OPEN and PeerJ are both commercial companies. If $99 > is sufficient to cover the costs of coordinating peer review and > publication, why would anyone pay even the $1,350 charged by PLoS ONE, > never mind the $3,000 plus charged by some of the traditional > publishers under hybrid arrangements? > > Is this an indication that transitioning to open access will indeed > open up the inelastic market for scholarly journals to competition? > > best, > > Heather G. Morrison, PhD > Freedom for scholarship in the internet age > http://pages.cmns.sfu.ca/heather-morrison/2012/12/12/freedom-for-scholarship-in-the-internet-age-post-defence-version/