Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm a big fan of this move by Cornell, but not, I think for the same reasons as most. First, I can't fault journals for charging fees. After all, they need to make money, and as long as it's a good value, people will pay it.

I like it because it will add some much needed competition into the journal pricing. Most likely, Nature is not going to change their pricing. If you have an article worthy of being published there, most people are going to pay a few grand and be happy to do so just to have their paper published. Assuming publishing prices do become transparent, I don't think it will drastically change the pricing system, but it will allow people to evaluate the value of such a publication.

The best analog I can think of are colleges themselves (and not just because of the academic connection). The value of both colleges and journals are significantly affected by their reputation. The price of the colleges have not leveled out, nor have they gone to zero (closer the opposite of both), but the prices do reflect the perceived "value" of that education. Hopefully the same will happen for journals.



I wonder if the assumption "they need to make money" is necessary. If we agree that the actual value of a journal (or its 'profit') is the voluntary participation of renowned scholars, then the journal is at best an administrative function, or a 'cost center' that has to actually be minimized !!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: