<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Re: “</span>There are sooo many subscription journals occupying the same niche — sometimes partially, but often enough completely — and yet they are all subscribed
to, widely or narrowly, but economically sufficiently, on the strength of the adage that "you can't afford to miss anything in your discipline".”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">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.<span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Dana L. Roth</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Millikan Library / Caltech 1-32</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">1200 E. California Blvd. Pasadena, CA 91125</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">626-395-6423 fax 626-792-7540</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a href="mailto:dzrlib@library.caltech.edu">dzrlib@library.caltech.edu</a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
<br>
</span><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a href="http://library.caltech.edu/collections/chemistry.htm" target="_blank">http://library.caltech.edu/collections/chemistry.htm</a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
</span><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> goal-bounces@eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Jan Velterop<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, December 19, 2012 2:21 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)<br>
<b>Cc:</b> LibLicense-L Discussion Forum<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [GOAL] Re: Further Fallout From Finch Folly<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">"...they [start-up subscription journals, or as Stevan calls them "bottom-rung journals"] were not subscribed to by institutions if there was no empty subject niche they were filling, nor before they had established their track-records
for quality."<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Where has Stevan been the last 4 decades?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The niche for new subscription journals always was (and for new journals in any model probably still is) defined by a surfeit of articles looking for a journal to submit to, not by an empty subject niche. There are sooo many subscription
journals occupying the same niche — sometimes partially, but often enough completely — and yet they are all subscribed to, widely or narrowly, but economically sufficiently, on the strength of the adage that "you can't afford to miss anything in your discipline".
And 'quality' has never been more than a vague and nebulous concept with little predictive value when applied to the vast majority of journals. (Not that I think that matters. Articles of true significance, in whichever journals, mostly drift to the surface
anyway. A good, and citable, article in a low Impact Factor journal is not so much dragged down by that low IF, but pushes the IF up, if IFs are what tickle your 'quality' fancy.)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the 'green' scenario, a move to 'gold' is supposed to happen only after everything is 'green' OA and subscriptions are not possible anymore. The then sudden need for OA journals is, in that scenario, only to be satisfied by a veritable
avalanche of start-up 'gold' journals, the credibility of which won't be assessable. And they will all feature on Beall's list.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">How much better to gradually build up a 'gold' OA infrastructure, while suspect new OA journals can be caught, or while Darwinian selection to weed them out can take place. That can be — fortunately, is being — done alongside 'green'. Remember,
while 'green' doesn't include 'gold', 'gold' *does* include 'green'.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I regard a Darwinian 'weeding' of non-credible journals (including those who Beall classifies as 'predatory') a wholly realistic scenario. Authors submitting to — and paying for — journals without duly checking the journals' credentials
are probably too gullible to expect to produce much worthwhile publishable science anyway. It's a harsh world, the scientific one. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jan Velterop<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>