From: Frances Pinter <[log in to unmask]> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 18:07:49 +0100 You are correct Sandy, the KU Title Fee is the 'getting to first copy cost' including overheads. These were set by publishers and range from $7,000 to $17,000. I think where there is on-going confusion is to conflate what you call the 'full cost of publishing' with discussions around fixed vs variable costs, cross-subsidisation etc. I believe your figure of $25,000 is a ‘fully loaded’ cost which varies from press to press and there is disagreement over what should or should not be included in this. The study* released by the Mellon Foundation last week puts a figure similar to yours, calculated on a similar basis to yours at around $25,000 - $27,000. *http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/113671/IU%20Michigan%20White%20Paper%2009-15-2015.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Of course, if publishers only cover their fixed costs then they will need other ways of making all ends meet for as long as they follow traditional financial thinking. Book publishing models still stick stubbornly to a manufacturing model replicating expected income on a unit-by-unit basis. It would look different if a service model were adopted. We still do not have a large enough dataset to know just how well OA books sell in print and on aggregated platforms with enhanced functionality, but the signs are good that there will still continue to be an income stream – even if the mix and prices change. Of course, print will always have its place as a form of packaging, but if fixed and variable costs were more transparent it would go a long way to making OA sustainable. As Geoff Crossick (http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/rereports/year/2015/monographs/) said, there is no single model that will work for all monographs. But, could we come up with better language to help move the discussion further? My first attempt at defining the $25,000 cost was as follows: It is the total substitutional amount required by a publisher if they are to reach and maintain a level of income that eliminates all risk, preserves their current way of working and reduces the need to think differently about products and services provided in the future; and it assumes no further changes in the knowledge infrastructure ecology in which we all operate. But this isn’t a particularly elegant way of expressing it. The AAU/ARL/Mellon model endorses the fully loaded cost and assumes no further risk to be carried by the publisher. It is commendable in its goal of reducing the instability of university presses, especially as institutional subsidies to existing presses contract. The threat this poses to the dissemination of scholarship is real. However, the programme, as envisaged now is restricted to North American university presses and institutions. It still excludes the vast majority of monographs published by the global community of scholars by presses outside the AAUP membership (As CEO of Manchester University Press I have pondered setting up a subsidiary in the US to become eligible as we have many authors in North America!). One positive impact of the initiative though would be to reduce the number of monographs competing for the small amount of money available in the global system. So, we suspect the KU model and others will be able to sit happily alongside this initiative. However, moving on to answer your specific questions please see the website http://www.knowledgeunlatched.org A list of each Title Fee for each monograph that is in KU's Round 2 collection can be found in Appendix A of the Round 2 Prospectus: http://collections.knowledgeunlatched.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Round-2-Prospectus1.pdf I believe that our library FAQs may help answer your remaining question about the new service charge: http://collections.knowledgeunlatched.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Round-2-FAQs.pdf KU is aiming to be as transparent as possible therefore we appreciate your interest in the KU model. You may also be interested in hearing that Penn State University Press is amongst the nineteen university presses included in the 26 publishers who are participating in the second round. Best, Frances Pinter __________________ Dr Frances Pinter, HonDLitt (Curtin) Founder and Executive Director Knowledge Unlatched Winner: IFLA/Brill Award for Open Access 2014 Winner: Curtin University Award for Best Innovation in Education 2015