Jim,
Good points all. I find it interesting that so much discussion focuses on the economics, while we often neglect the question of who is reading all this stuff. As we move more to payment on the author end (whether author or institution), the motivation for the publisher to demand something of exceptional quality or of interest to a fair number of readers rapidly goes down. I can cancel a journal if it doesn't find readers on my campus, but there is still pressure to pay APCs needed to stuff someone's cv and advance their career. The divorce of readership from the economics of publishing should be of much more concern that it seems to be. Nor do the optics of paying to publish, however framed, look good to a public that already has grave doubts about the value of the academic enterprise. I will see your Daniel and raise you an Ecclesiastes (12.12): Faciendi plures libros nullus est finis, frequensque meditatio, carnis afflictio est.
Fred
red W. Jenkins, Ph.D.Associate Dean for Collections and Operations, University Libraries
Professor, University Libraries and Department of Religious Studies
University of Dayton
Non minima pars eruditionis est bonos nosse libros.--J.J. Scaliger