RE: Homer Simpson at the NIH

["David Prosser" <david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk>]

Joe

If we take open access out of the picture for the moment, your 
view of larger players taking an increasing proportion of a 
non-expanding market is a frightening one for the smaller, 
society publishers.  It matches with the view that I have taken 
of the 'big squeeze' for the smaller players and suggests that if 
nothing changes in the market then the diversity of publishers 
(including not-for-profits and university presses) that we all 
want to see maintained is at risk.

Now let's reintroduce the idea of open access.  Unfortunately, 
through what we might call a prism of misunderstanding, open 
access has been seen as a great threat to the smaller publishers. 
My suggestion is that handled well it could actually provide a 
survival mechanism for them.  Society publishers and university 
presses have a number of great advantages that could help them 
thrive in a publication-charge open access journal environment - 
they often have high-quality journals with excellent author 
services and they have close connections with their communities 
(a bonus when searching for referees).

I can't imagine that to date any society publisher has lost its 
independence due to open access.  Some have lost their 
independence due to an inability to compete in the big deal 
environment.  As you suggest, the subscription market is not 
going to get any easier for the small publishers.  That's why it 
makes sense to take a good look at open access.

David


-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Joseph J. Esposito
Sent: 22 August 2007 18:43
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: Re: Homer Simpson at the NIH

David,

If there is less money in the system, the bigger players are 
better positioned to survive; if there is more money in the 
system, the bigger players are better positioned to survive. The 
issue is not the size of the market; it is the maturity of the 
market.  Publishing is close to a no-growth business.  In 
no-growth markets, consolidation is a likely, if not inevitable, 
strategy.

The only reason that academic journals are published by such a 
huge number of publishers--unlike, say, college texts (6 players 
in the U.S. have 85% of the market)--is that the not-for-profit 
status of many of the players makes them resistant to some 
aspects of the marketplace.  That is neither good nor bad; it is 
what it is.  If all journals publishers were publicly traded and 
thus subject to Wall Street's stern review, consolidation would 
come quickly; we would be down to three publishers in 5 years.

The large players (most of whom are commercial) have learned to 
work with the restrictions on growth.  They develop budget 
allocation strategies (the Big Deal) and solicit professional 
society publications.  Their growth (NOT the market's growth, 
which is nill) is slowed down by the NFPs, but it is not stopped.

Incidentally, I can't help remarking that this long thread has as 
its subject line "Homer Simpson at the NIH."

Joe Esposito

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Prosser" <david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 11:21 AM
Subject: RE: Homer Simpson at the NIH

> I'm happy to use publishers other than the American Physical 
> Society as examples.  The trouble is that few publishers 
> (commercial or non-commercial) have been as open as the APS in 
> giving their revenue per article.  However, if you would rather 
> then let's use the example of Optics Express which I understand 
> makes a surplus (and is open access, incidentally) on a 
> publication charge of $1,200 or so (dependent on the length of 
> the paper).
>
> Joe contends that if there is less money in the system it is 
> the big players who are best placed to survive.  I'm just 
> wondering if that necessarily true as some (not all, some) 
> smaller publishers (both commercial and non-commercial) appear 
> to operate on less revenue per paper.
>
> David C Prosser PhD
> Director
> SPARC Europe
> E-mail:  david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk