This is just shifting the cost from the readers to the writers. It doesn't make it any better as the prices are completely out of touch with reality. Note that this is not the cost for registering at a conference; that is separate. This is just the publishing fee for each paper.
It's not really shifting the cost from readers to writers, since these fee existed beforehand though. They just went from double-dipping to single dipping.
The open access pricing is different and higher than the old closed access pricing. That is the switch in all open access publishing. In any case, both the old prices and new ones are absurdly high.
The pricing is not about the cost of storing and serving the articles. It is partly direct revenue replacement and partly “stick” to get institutions to subscribe to APC allowance buckets.
Comments
This is just shifting the cost from the readers to the writers. It doesn't make it any better as the prices are completely out of touch with reality. Note that this is not the cost for registering at a conference; that is separate. This is just the publishing fee for each paper.
It's not really shifting the cost from readers to writers, since these fee existed beforehand though. They just went from double-dipping to single dipping.
The open access pricing is different and higher than the old closed access pricing. That is the switch in all open access publishing. In any case, both the old prices and new ones are absurdly high.
The pricing is not about the cost of storing and serving the articles. It is partly direct revenue replacement and partly “stick” to get institutions to subscribe to APC allowance buckets.
in an open access world, who should be paying the people who are reviewing the papers (which cost time/money)?
Reviewers aren't paid. This is just money for ACM, the non profit.
ah in that case, this is long over due.