[GOAL] Re: Further Fallout From Finch Folly

[Andrew A. Adams]

> Are many of the new commercial journals actually ‘subscribed to’ or
> are they added to existing packages in hopes they will capture
> sufficient market share to continue? … my assumption is that the
> concept of "loss leaders" is NOT operable for society published
> journals.

While I don't think many societies consider "loss leading" with one or more 
journals, I do think there are journals suported by scholarly societies that 
do not directly cover their "costs". It all depends on the society. The ACM 
is IMHO one of the better societies on OA, though I would still like to push 
it further and more quickly and will do so as opportunity arises - they've 
just compelted a major move on OA and the publications board seem unwilling 
to entertain new ideas before the current one beds in. They do not require 
each and every publication to directly cover its own costs in subscriptions, 
or even in usage in their digital library. As a non-prifit with an elected 
publications board while the society seeks to maintain proper operating 
budget controls they also cross-subsidise operations and do not try to 
allocate fixed central costs evenly or even pro-rated to all publications.

-- 
Professor Andrew A Adams                      aaa at meiji.ac.jp
Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration,  and
Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan       http://www.a-cubed.info/