Book
People is published by Chappell Thorne
16 Chilham Way, Bromley, Kent BR2 7PR
Telephone: 020 8462 5000 • Fax: 020 8462 9993
ISDN: 020 8462 8076
Email: bookpeople@chappell-thorne.com
Sub
Editor: Paula Arkell
Production: Liz Bingold
Advertising Sales: Jenny Kearl
© 2002 by Chappell Thorne. All rights reserved. No part of
this publication may be reproduced, stored in any retrieval system,
or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.
TOP
BLURRING
THE EDGES
There
has been much talk recently about the number of editors moving
out of publishing companies and into literary agencies. Are the
traditional boundaries on the verge of change? Philippa Harrison,
former CEO of Little, Brown is the most recent and one of the
highest profile editors to make such a move. Philippa is joining
the board of Ed Victor Ltd as Editorial Director and most emphatically
'not as an agent'.
Philippa
will work with a number of the agency's authors on specific projects,
from inception through to the synopsis/outline stage and, when
appropriate, on the editing of their manuscripts in collaboration
with their publishers.
Ed Victor says: 'I have known and admired Philippa Harrison ever
since we worked together at Jonathan Cape in the late '60s. She
is, to my mind, among the best of the editors in London, as she
has proved to me time and time again during her publishing career,
the most recent examples being the editorial work she did with
my clients Anne Robinson and Will Hutton at Little Brown last
year."
The idea to bring someone with Philippa's background into the
agency and create this role was Ed's, and Philippa is really excited
by the prospect: 'My particular love has always been editing and
working with writers and I have always admired Ed as an agent,
so I greatly look forward to working with him and some of the
writers from his remarkable list of clients. It will be wonderful
to have the same space and time to edit that I had all those years
ago when I first learnt my craft at Jonathan Cape."
Ed Victor points out that the concept has been on trial prior
to Philippa joining the company. 'Philippa has already worked
her editorial magic with clients such as Andrew Marr, Pete Townsend,
Tim Waterstone and Sir Ranulph Fiennes. My colleagues and I look
forward to collaborating with her on many more of our authors'
works.'
Is this a blueprint for more literary agencies to add value to
their service and offer publishers a more polished product in
the form of improved outlines and synopses? Philippa obviously
feels that she will have the time to do a better editing job away
from the pressures of the publishing house. The bond between author
and editor could possibly become even stronger when they are both
working together with the aim of achieving a deal for the author.
TOP
BOOKMASTER
TAKES OFF IN NEW DIRECTION
Now more than ever, publishers and book distributors are
faced with uncertain times. The advent of the mega-stores, changing
buyer habits, the rise (and fall?) of the ‘e-tailers’,
print-on-demand and the rights issues generated by digital content
are all creating new challenges for the book industry.
The ability of technology to meet these challenges was canvassed
in a recent study into the use of technology in the US publishing
industry. More than 440 senior executive were surveyed, and the
level of interest in this topic was demonstrated by the unprecedented
20% response.*
One striking aspect of the survey was that a majority of respondents
had had at least one (and often more than one) negative experience
in applying technology across a variety of areas. In fact, the
overall level of satisfaction with fulfilment and publishing systems
was generally low. Yet most publishers agree that information
technology plays an important part in driving new business strategies.
Unfortunately, until recently, publishers looking for one integrated
IT system were faced with two unenviable choices. The first was
to choose a publishing specific system that was strong in some
areas but didn’t cover their entire business requirements.
The other was to pick a generic software package that didn’t
cover publishing specific requirements at all.
Either choice almost always resulted in the need for significant
and expensive modifications. And the solution that was eventually
deployed invariably became, in effect, a unique solution for that
particular publisher, with the concomitant high support and maintenance
costs.
A third alternative that has been forced upon many publishers
has been to interface several components to provide a complete
solution. Unfortunately the costs of developing and maintaining
these interfaces is now becoming prohibitive for many.
To make matters worse, some specialised publishing systems use
proprietary and out-dated technology with no clear path to the
future.
This poses the question: 'Is it possible to have the best of all
worlds – a standard solution that meets all of a publisher’s
and distributor’s business requirements while at the same
time utilising leading and accepted technologies?'
Jim Abad, managing director of TMS Tailor Made Systems, developer
of Bookmaster Publishing & Distribution System, has been pursuing
this ideal for many years and believes it is now close to becoming
a reality.
'Three years ago we had a vision of creating a standard software
package that could handle virtually every aspect of a publisher’s
business. One that could be implemented economically, that would
provide an unprecedented level of integration and that would utilise
the latest technology,' said Mr Abad. 'We have now progressed
a long way towards achieving that vision. Our work has been extremely
well received by our customers around the world and we are ready
to share it with publishers in the UK.'
Steve Hall, TMS International sales and marketing manager, believes
the time is right to introduce Bookmaster’s new direction
in the UK.
'We believe publishers in the UK are ready to look at a genuine
alternative to currently available solutions. One that is strong
in publishing and distribution, which incorporates e-commerce,
business intelligence, warehouse management, publishing, rights
and title management and CRM in one standard package and one that
has a credible pathway to the future,' he said.
Many British publishers aren’t aware that Bookmaster is
now the most widely used publishing system in the world, used
by more than 80 publishers in 16 countries. Bookmaster customers
around the world include such well-known names as HarperCollins,
Pan Macmillan, Lexis Nexis, Harvard University Press, Random House,
Penguin, Pearson Education, McGraw-Hill, Thomson Learning, Yale
University Press, Booksite Africa, On the Dot, Gyldendal and Simon
& Schuster.
In the UK Booksource, Scotland’s largest independent book
distributor, has been a happy Bookmaster customer for almost five
years.
'Using technology to provide real business benefits is essential,'
notes Davinder Bedi, Booksource general manager. 'We have an excellent
infrastructure to support the growth of our business and we are
looking to add to our client list. Bookmaster has been fundamental
in supporting our business through this period of change and as
a business solution for a book distributor or publisher, it is
about as perfect as you can get.'
The rapidly expanding Tempus Group has sales and distribution
organisations in four countries, all of which use Bookmaster.
Mike Walton, Tempus finance director is also a Bookmaster enthusiast.
'Bookmaster is the operational backbone that has allowed Tempus
to double its business over the last four years,' he explained.
Gill and MacMillan, the largest publisher in the Republic of Ireland,
works closely with TMS’ UK Software Associate, Bookmaster
UK.
'Bookmaster has become an integral part of our business and has
been central in the implementation of our strategies both for
e-business and electronic communication with client publishers,'
said Dermot O’Dwyer, Gill & Macmillan finance director.
'We have been happy with the excellent level of support and professionalism
we have experienced from BookMaster UK throughout all these developments.'
Bookmaster’s current and future direction will be
announced in the UK at a seminar entitled 'The Best of All Worlds'.
To be held in London at 9.30am on Friday 18th October. For booking,
email marketing@tms.ws, or call Bookmaster UK on 01249 818220.
Website is www.tms.ws/BestOfAllWorlds. Attendees at the seminar
will receive a free copy of the study referred to above, '2002
Technology in Publishing Benchmark Study'.
TOP
LIGHTNING
SOURCE AT FRANKFURT
Suzanne
Wilson-Higgins, Commercial Director, Lightning Source UK Ltd.
highlights her expectations of Frankfurt 2002. Lightning Source
are exhibiting in Hall 8.0 stand S971
Question.
Why is Frankfurt Bookfair so important to a publisher services
company like Lightning Source?
Answer: Unlike publishers we are not engaged in exchanging rights
in books at the bookfair. We are actively pursuing new distribution
agreements to reach other markets and to penetrate deeper into
the US and UK print-on-demand supply chain. Lightning Source seeks
to maximise single copy POD sales for publishers through all available
channels to market. Frankfurt is still the best global marketplace
to meet with distributors, wholesalers, library suppliers and
of course, it’s a great place to meet our publisher clients.
Q: What does Lightning Source hope to achieve at Frankfurt 2002?
A: I think there are two key objectives: First, to enter/develop
agreements with publishers from all over the world who are wishing
to reach the UK and US markets with low demand titles. We are
keen to keep our database growing beyond the 100,000 titles we
already have.
Secondly, to enter/develop channel partnerships with distributors,
wholesalers, retailers and library suppliers to improve access
to market for all POD titles. We want to help publishers sell
books and help readers receive books faster.
Q What will you be telling publishers about Lightning Source that’s
new for Frankfurt 2002?
A Three things: improved quality, lower prices and unprecedented
growth in demand for our services. Within the last quarter our
operation in Tennessee USA has refreshed much of its print technology
equipment, moving to IBM 4100s and Indigo colour printing technology.
Lightning Source UK launches a new sterling printing price list
at Frankfurt that makes POD possible for more UK publishers to
launch a programme. Our combined UK and US sites printed over
325,000 books in September 2002 and we are predicting significant
month on month growth throughout 2002 and 2003. More publishers
are realising the cashflow benefits of no inventory, less handling
and faster service to market for low demand titles. Our short-run
and ultra-short-run business is also booming. Even with all this
growth, I still believe we are just scratching the surface. So
we will be very busy at Frankfurt 2002!
TOP
DON'T
IGNORE THE NORTH AMERICAN MARKET
Since
North America is the largest English language market in the world,
it clearly cannot be ignored. The internet has certainly made
it easier for overseas publishers to gain visibility for their
books in North America, but without a local distributor it is
difficult to generate sales beyond determined and dedicated specialist
readers who are also prepared to pay the high costs of international
shipping.
North
American distributors International Specialized Book Services
(ISBS) of Portland, Orgeon, who have been providing marketing
and distribution services to academic and specialist publishers
from around the world for almost 30 years, will again be attending
the Frankfurt Book Fair. So anyone publishing in these areas and
interested in increasing their sales in North America should consider
stopping by to see them. Its client publishers cover a range of
different subject areas including the social sciences, humanities,
law, natural sciences, medical sciences, literature and religious
studies.
ISBS has developed a range of services geared to its publishers
and their customers, including extensive direct mail campaigns,
displaying books at academic conferences and specialist trade
events, sending books to review media, teleselling to specialist
book sellers, supplying data in a range of formats to various
online bookstores and books in print databases. A key part of
the company's approach is to emphasise the publisher’s name
as far as possible in promotional materials, so that over time
the publisher gains a clear identity in the North American market
and with potential authors.
ISBS marketing manager Tamma Greenfield would be pleased to speak
to publishers looking for distribution in North America and will
be based in Hall 8, Stand B945. Or e-mail tamma@isbs.com
TOP
TRUE
'POD FROM ANTONY ROWE - GARDNERS
While acknowledging that the Frankfurt Buchmesse is about
selling rights, Antony Rowe see benefits in not just attending
but exhibiting.
Antony Rowe will be exhibiting again this year at the bookfair,
promoting ‘true’ pod – creating a database of
selected titles and cost effectively manufacturing single or multiple
copies to order.
We can manufacture single copies and get them to the consumer
quickly and cost effectively and this makes the Antony Rowe –
Gardners package unique. There are many printers capable of producing
ultra short print-runs, but a combination of foresight, combined
with market research and the latest technology led to the Antony
Rowe – Gardners (Book Wholesalers) partnership, offering
this package. Once titles are set up on the system, customers
can order a book and collect it from the bookshop within days
or take advantage of a home delivery service. This reduces inventory
and avoids the need to warehouse small quantities, a major benefit
being that less capital is employed, plus generating a regular
inflow of cash from titles that may be out of print but need not
be.
It is these key features that appeal to senior executives in publishing
houses, managing directors, finance directors, sales and marketing
directors, supply chain directors – all have a vested interest
in ‘true’ pod and many of these attend the Buchmesse
and are prepared to talk about ways of generating extra income.
Visit us in Hall 8, Stand B 914
TOP
NEW
DIRECTIONS AT THE PUBLISHING TRAINING CENTRE
The Publishing Training Centre (PTC) is
an educational charity set up to serve the training needs of the
publishing industry.
While best known for its editorial skills training, it
runs more than 60 open courses, covering marketing, rights and
contracts, software skills, electronic publishing and management.
Whatever the subject area, the emphasis is always on developing
practical skills and PTC tutors are invariably current practitioners.
As publishing evolves, so do the courses – existing programmes
are modified and new courses are developed. Recent additions include
Data Protection Act: the Impact on Publishing and Adobe Acrobat
in Pre-press.
But it’s not just the content of courses that is changing.
Technology has opened up a wealth of new possibilities for the
delivery of training.
About a year ago a number of PTC customers were surveyed on the
subject of training in electronic format. The prevailing view
was that classroom-based training was still the best way to learn,
but that e-learning could have a valuable role to play in supporting
more traditional methods.
Following that survey, the PTC is now preparing online training
material that will dove-tail with some of its existing open courses.
Initially, only one or two of the most popular courses will be
enhanced in this way. Delegates booking on Copy-Editing Skills
and Proofreading for Editors will soon have access to pre-course
material and exercises, including post-course support, which will
include discussion groups and bulletin boards, as well as further
exercises and case studies. Help from a tutor – another
element that respondents to the survey rated as important –
will also be included.
Note that the new online support is not there to replace existing
material on the open courses. It’s designed to help delegates
(a) to arrive better prepared and (b) to continue learning and
consolidate their new skills after the course has finished. Therefore
anyone who is unwilling or unable to participate in the online
element will not suffer as a result.
The new service will also be open to people who have attended
/ are going to attend one of the relevant courses before the online
element is launched.
The learning process will no longer begin and end at the doors
of The Publishing Training Centre. Preparation work will no longer
need to be done in the classroom – and further practice
and support will be available for up to a year after the course
has finished. All this will free up more of that invaluable time
delegates get to spend face-to-face with a tutor.
For more information on training from The Publishing Training
Centre, call 020 8874 2718 or visit www.train4publishing.co.uk.
TOP
FRANKFURT
FAIR BOOSTS CONFIDENCE
"We
will do everything we can to make the Frankfurt Book Fair an implement
serving the industry as it seeks to boost its economic recovery."
It was with this positive declaration of intent that Book Fair
director Volker Neumann ended his opening press conference at
the Frankfurt Book Fair 2002.
The
cultural aspect of the world's biggest book fair was also something
to be proud of this year, according to Neumann. The 6,375 exhibitors
from 110 countries and the thousands of visitors were set to enjoy
a galaxy of 2,000 events. Many featured in the programme presented
by Guest of Honour Lithuania, others as part of the new Book Fair
focal theme 'Bridges for a World Divided' and still more in the
Book Fair's various centres for events; from the Comic Centre
to the e-media's ICICOM and the new children's books forum.
Chairman of the board Hubertus Schenkel spoke of the book market's
situation internationally. He expected that publishing companies
will be relying increasingly on the predictable best-selling authors
in the months ahead. In his view, the current difficulties will
restrict publishing companies in their willingness to experiment.
It was unavoidable that the diversity of books on offer was bound
to suffer.
The president of the German Publishers and Booksellers Association,
Dieter Schormann, pointed out that publishing and the book trade
remained structurally steady even in the present difficult economic
climate. But although Christmas business was expected to be good,
the industry as a whole should be ready for a drop in sales overall
for the current year.
Volker Neumann announced to the press conference that the programme
of national Guests of Honour would be continued beyond 2003. The
Guest of Honour programme enabled the Book Fair to give impetus
to the culture and literature of the countries themselves; the
national presentations had become an indispensable and crucial
part of the Frankfurt Book Fair, and had become an important highlight
in Germany's cultural calendar.
So this year's Book Fair sent positive signals in difficult times.
The exhibitors enjoyed good levels of business activity, and the
increased number of international publishing companies underlined
the key role of the Fair as the world's most important trading
centre for rights and licences. Small and medium-sized publishing
companies in particular benefited from their attendance.
The total of 265,000 visitors - 2.6% more than last year - reflects
the continued importance of Frankfurt for the presentation of
new titles. With huge crowds of people at readings and book-signings,
the Book Fair was also a successful showcase for publishers to
present their authors. The Comic Centre was a persuasive attraction,
offering children and teenagers a closer look at the world of
books.
With a small budget and intelligent planning, Guest of Honour
Lithuania achieved an ambitious and lively presentation. The success
of the Guest of Honour programme proved a convincing endorsement
of the Fair's decision to continue with its Guest of Honour series
beyond 2003.
Considerable scope was also given to the perspective of countries
in the southern hemisphere within the framework of the focal theme
‘Bridges for a World Divided’. Thus the Frankfurt
Book Fair initiated a process of dialogue across the boundaries
of cultures and continents.
The Frankfurt Book Fair 2003 is scheduled for 8 to 13 October.
The Guest of Honour at the next Fair will be Russia.
TOP
QUARTO
GROUP HITS UPBEAT NOTE
Quarto, the London-based and listed
international book publisher, issued the following trading update,
based on unaudited figures, in respect of the third quarter of
2002 and the nine months ended 30 September 2002.
As is its normal practice, Quarto also produces figures for the
trailing 12 months, which are also ended 30 September 2002. These
are derived from unaudited pro forma management figures.
Group sales for the third quarter rose by 5% to £20.81m
(2001: £19.79m), giving pre-tax profits up 40% at £0.95m
(2001: £0.68m). For the first nine months of 2002, sales
were also ahead by 5% to £52.65m (£49.97m), and pre-tax
profits rose by 49% to £2.47m (2001: £1.66m). On a
constant currency basis, sales were ahead by approximately 7%.
“The International Co-edition Publishing Division had strong
sales in the third quarter and, for the first nine months, had
sales of £27.47m (2001: £26.40m). Quintet’s
revival continued, and we had useful contributions from Marshall
and Quantum. Overall, the result is very much in line with expectations,
and well ahead of last year,” said Laurence F Orbach, Quarto’s
chairman and chief executive. “The Publishing Division’s
sales of £25.18m (2001: £23.57m) showed good growth
in the US, the UK, and Australia, its principal markets."
The Division primarily creates content for publication internationally
by other publishers.
“We have orders in hand to fulfil our expectations for the
year for the International Co-edition Publishing Division,"
added Orbach. "The weaker dollar will continue to understate
the growth of our sales, but will only marginally affect the group’s
profit. The retail environment has softened in some of our key
markets, and the labour dispute on the West Coast of the US may
have some impact on deliveries into our largest single market,
but we remain comfortable that, in the absence of unforeseen circumstances,
we’ll meet market expectations for 2002.
“The biggest trade event in the calendar, the annual Frankfurt
Book Fair, has just concluded, and our forward lists of titles
were well received. We are looking for good, steady growth as
the publishing community reaffirms its confidence in the future
of the book.”
Quarto expects to announce its results for the year to 31 December
2002 in mid-February 2003.
Quarto’s Head Office is situated in Islington, London N7
and its shares are fully listed on the London Stock Exchange.
TOP
CAN
THE SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS MARKET WORK BETTER?
The
market for scientific, technical and medical journals may not
be working well, claims a recent statement from the OFT. The statement
follows an informal consultation carried out by the OFT on the
STM market.
John Vickers, Director General of Fair Trading said: 'Journals
are the principal means by which scientific knowledge is disseminated.
The market, which operates
worldwide, has a number of features that suggest that competition
may not be working effectively. However, market forces harnessing
new technology may change this without the need for intervention.'
The statement notes that three main groups publish the journals:
commercial publishers, university presses and learned societies.
Overall the market is fragmented, but the commercial publishers
have control of many of the most prestigious publications.
The main concerns noted by the OFT were:
c price increases above inflation
c substantial price disparity between commercial journals and
non-commercial journals
c high levels of profitability for commercial STM publishing (around
10-15% above other forms of commercial journal publishing)
c bundling of a large selection of their journals by commercial
publishers possibly hindering others from entering the market.
The OFT identifies a number of possible ways that emerging market
forces may in practice address the problems, without the need
for regulatory intervention:
c signs of price restraint by commercial publishers
c increased buyer power stemming from the emergence of electronic
journals and articles on the internet, which is increasingly allowing
the academic community to bypass expensive commercial publishers
c the power of academics – academics as authors have an
incentive to publish in the most prestigious journals, but they
also are motivated to ensure that their articles are available
to a wide audience through low-priced journals with liberal distribution
rights.
The report concludes that if competition fails to improve, the
OFT may consider further action and consider, due to the global
nature of the market, whether such action could be conducted internationally.
TOP
SfEP
DIRECTORY
Curiosity and a creative meticulous approach
Is this the editor for you? If you are trying to find an editor,
proofreader, rewriter or general tweaker and improver of your
written communication, this self-assessment may appeal to you.
And if it doesn't, there are 462 other entrants to choose from
in the invaluable SfEP Directory.
The Society for Editors and Proofreaders believes that this is
the best, the easiest and the cheapest way to find the editorial
professional you need.
The new feature in the 2003 Directory is that Advanced members
- the most highly experienced and established - are highlighted
in their entries and in the indexes.
Regular features of the Directory, which is fully revised and
updated each year, include:
c Details of over 460 freelance members offering a wide range
of services - not just proofreading and copy-editing but (almost)
everything from abridging and abstracting to typesetting and website
design;
c Indexes, to help you find freelances offering specific subjects,
media or skills, making it easy to pinpoint the right person for
the job;
c A geographical index, enabling you to locate freelances in your
area
c A listing of corporate associates
Companies that use freelance editorial services can obtain a FREE
copy of the Directory from: SfEP, Riverbank House, 1 Putney Bridge
Approach, London SW6 3JD. Tel: 020 7736 3278, email: admin@sfep.org.uk).
Other organisations and individuals should send a cheque for £15
(£18 for overseas orders). A fully searchable copy of the
Directory is available on our website at www.sfep.org.uk
For further information about the Directory and background details
about the SfEP, contact Penny Williams by phone 01582 730765 or
email pr@sfep.org.uk
TOP
FASTER,
MORE ACCURATE REFERENCE SERVICE
Digital
reference company xrefer has adopted a new search engine to bring
faster and more accurate searches to its one million users.
Already
a leader in providing highquality integrated reference information,
this new search technology plugs into xrefer's systems to provide
market leading search results.
Based on Jakarta Lucene, an open source project from The Apache
Jakarta Project, xrefer’s new search engine provides fast
accurate results to subscribers of xreferplus, its digital reference
library, as well as users of its free reference services.
xreferplus works with some of the world’s best known publishers
to aggregate and integrate their reference works online, thus
increasing the value of reference content. xrefer contains encyclopedias,
dictionaries, thesauri, books of quotations and reference works
covering a wide range of subjects. And the new backend systems
allow for all this content to be cross-referenced, creating
some of the richest content on the internet.
Over
20 publishers are represented, including Blackwells, Bloomsbury,
Butterworth Heinemann, Cambridge University Press, Elsevier Science,
Harper Collins, Macmillan, Penguin, Routledge, Wiley and OUP.
Carl Roach, technical director, said: “Jakarta Lucene has
fitted in well with our reference engine architecture. Having
the source code available has been a boon and is enabling us to
further integrate the system, particularly with our unique cross-reference
technologies.”
This cross-referencing is xrefer's unique proposition. The web
has offered a golden opportunity to increase the value of reference
content. But this value can only be realised through aggregating
and integrating content from different sources, placing a wide
range of reference material on a single site.
TOP
OPEN
ACCESS JOURNALS - WILL THEY FLY?
Notes
from APLSP/OSI round table meeting held 13 September 2002 at the
Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists.
The
pressures towards open access – the scholar’s view
Les Carr, University of Southampton.
There are now so many journals, and so many new articles each
year, that no university can hope to have access to all of them.
Many journals of interest to scholars are inaccessible to them.
If, as authors, they can’t cite the right material in their
own papers, they can’t get cited themselves, or even published.
This creates two classes, the ‘Harvards’ and the ‘have-nots’
– those who are inside or outside the financial firewalls.
Whereas we like to imagine the literature as an interconnected
jigsaw, it is in fact disjointed and inaccessible. Need to subscribe
to different publishers’ journals in given topic; these
may not be interoperable or patchily available, despite bundles
etc.
Accessibility depends on the reader’s location. Would like
to be able to browse and search across entire literature, and
visualise its interconnectedness.
An article is not a single event, but evolves from an initial
research idea, through a conference paper and preprint via a succession
of revisions before it reaches its published form. Perhaps it
should continue to evolve thereafter. We need to talk about communication
rather than publication, via one archive, one interface. ‘E-science’
– the use of IT to allow the collaborative analysis of large
datasets. Subsequent readers need to be able to re-analyse the
data.
Summary
Open access (OA) is natural for scholars, as their real business
is in sharing information.
Discussion points
• As scholarly information becomes more diverse, we move
away from traditional ‘publication’ and on to data
exchange and communication.
LC: We will still need peer-reviewed publication
for a long time yet. It will expand out into these other ideas
in the much longer term. (For now, the only way to check and verify
what an author has done is to repeat the experiment.)
• It breaks down for life sciences, which are competitive
rather than collaborative. Databases such as GenBank lack context.
• Would a paper on a preprint server be regarded as being
as valuable as exactly the same paper in a peer-reviewed journal?
This depends on which area of science people are working in.
LC: Even though a paper’s perceived importance
is influenced significantly by which journal it is in, scientists
take other things into account in forming a judgement, such as
the reputation of the authors, collaborators, supervisors etc.
However, there is no guarantee of source or credibility of information.
The
commercial case for open access
Jan Velterop, BioMed Central
BioMed Central’s model was designed to ‘turn publishing
on its head’. It is hoped The model will become profitable,
though perhaps with a smaller margin than conventional publishing.
Why shoe-horn e-journals into business models designed for print?
Only open access (OA) can make scientific results ‘optimally
useful’. In the US Constitution, copyright was envisaged
as promoting science etc, so scholarly communication should not
be constrained by it.
To finance OA it is best to remove charity from the equation,
as subsidies can dry up. We should now be selling service rather
than content: peer review, making web-ready, hosting and embedding
within the literature e.g, via CrossRef. Costs remain largely
the same, apart from the lack of printing and distribution. Income
will come largely from the same sources – academic institutions.
In the print-derived model, authors transferred copyright to publishers;
in the new model, the institution pays on the author’s behalf
for a service (author retains copyright).
Discussion points
• Publishers (journals) compete for authors – this
will become complicated if financial considerations become a factor.
• Each discipline has its own ‘ego-system’.
For example, in peer review of most medical journals referees
are anonymous to authors, but authors are not anonymous to referees.
• Concerns about archiving (LOCKSS – Lots of Copies
Keep Stuff Safe (Stanford)). If print required, perhaps on-demand
only? Would existence of numerous ‘archival’ copies
raise questions of authenticity?
• The overall costs to academia under the new model are
reduced compared with the print-based model. Free access gives
high downloads, gives widest dissemination. ‘All use is
fair use.’
Alternatives
to open access
Martin Richardson, Oxford University Press
Disadvantages of open access are that it may encourage quantity
rather than quality; may be unable to compete for the best papers;
may limit innovation because of a difficulty in raising funds.
OA will not work for certain types of journal, for example: Humanities
and Social Sciences; content other than primary research; those
with high costs because of high rejection rates (there are some
with rejection rates of around 90% which publish only 12 articles
per year).
Alternatives for giving improved accessibility include large buying
groups (consortia, individual subscriptions via a society), flexible
pricing (free online with print, free archives, free access for
developing countries).
The case study: Nucleic Acids Research. Contains original research
and reviews. Archive is free (on Highwire and PubMed Central)
six months after publication and free to developing countries.
Funded by subscriptions, advertising and charges for long papers
and receives 125 000 hits per month. There is not much difference
in tail-off of downloads for an issue with restricted access compared
with one with no access controls. There is no increase in downloads
when an article goes out of access control after six months.
Summary
OA does not necessarily increase dissemination.
Discussion points
• Do librarians get a sense of status from the size of their
budget, and is this an obstacle to OA? No – most of them
simply want to provide the best service.
• Physics journals carrying papers that have already been
posted on free preprint servers are not yet showing greater attrition
rates than other journals. Physicists at one particular institution
strongly resisted cancellation of the relevant traditional journals
when asked by their librarians.
• Physics journals tend to cite the publication in an established
journal in tandem with the e-print citation.
• The sales of the relevant IOP journal are actually growing.
Its impact factor and published extent have also increased. Authors
and readers appear to want a citable peer-reviewed journal and
a preprint archive.
• Consortial access has increased overall access only marginally,
whereas OA should do so dramatically.
• As a young researcher, I quickly learned which journals
were available in the library and which were not. I would not
have bothered to try to get articles from the latter. However,
life scientists will often try following the links to articles
they have found using PubMed, and may thereby stumble across articles
from journals outside their core list. Suspect it is the same
for the generation that has been brought up on Google.
• The problem is in funding the transition to OA. We could
get at least as much access as at present if the current library
funding were switched to the departments for authors to pay for
publication in OA journals.
• Could offer the author the choice: pay for free dissemination,
or don’t pay and have restricted dissemination. This is
the model used by the journal of the Entomological Society of
America, as highlighted in a presentation to a recent ALPSP meeting
(‘I(mmediate) F(ree) W(eb) A(ccess)’ charges).
• These issues will be covered in the forthcoming second
Follett report.
• BioMed Central’s costs per article are currently
three to four times the $500 currently charged to authors. It
will need to handle a few thousand articles per year – then
it will be viable. Need to keep costs low. BMC has done so by
means of a very high degree of automation (even in the choice
of referees), minimal copy-editing and helping authors to prepare
their manuscripts in XML. Question raised as to whether we are
misleading the scientific community as to the true costs of publication.
• Publishers will be unable to make the same margin (~ 30%?)
they have been used to if they switch to the new model, because
it is more transparent. The party that pays will now have the
choice. This will drive down the price, and the profits! But it
will take several years to break even. Publishers will need a
large margin to justify the risk.
• IOP's New Journal of Physics was a journal launched specifically
for the OA model. However, it had to deal with an ‘uneven
playing field’ in the sense that it needed to establish
itself editorially as a new journal, at the same time as trying
the new model. It has typically published 20-30 articles per year
and there has been a high rejection rate. The charging mechanism
has therefore meant that published authors are also paying for
the peer review of the rejected manuscripts. This year the journal
expects to publish around 150 articles, as a result of intense
commissioning activity. However, only half of the published authors
have paid the $500 charge - the rest have benefited from waivers
of various kinds. The journal is now five years old.
A hybrid model was tried in collaboration with SPARC and a consortium
including the University of Utah. Utah authors would have been
paid for by the consortium. However, no manuscripts have been
received as a result of this, highlighting, perhaps, the fact
that the link between authors and libraries is only weak.
• A new venture of this type must have high prestige, but
acquiring prestige takes time, even if the quality is good.
• BioMed Central is only 18 months old, so it doesn’t
yet have an impact factor. BMC is confident that the IF will be
good (based on citations they are presently receiving), but say
they need drive and deep pockets in the meantime.
• What happens if an article published in an OA journal
is plagiarised? Some felt that this was no more of an issue than
for subscription model. BioMed Central plans to ask authors it
they are happy for their article to be republished. Some felt
that plagiarism was easier to detect online than in print. It
was noted that open-access journals were not alone in allowing
authors to retain copyright, and that the copyright/plagiarism
question was a red herring in the context of OA.
• OA is one of many possible models; no one model will be
right for all journals. Most models appear unstable. Meanwhile
suggest ongoing dialogue between ALPSP and JISC – this could
cover questions of funding the transition to OA, for example.
SPARC could perhaps also be involved, with special reference to
the concern that small not-for-profit publishers may suffer as
a result of consortium deals with large commercial publishers.
• Library funding is a tiny fraction of overall research
budgets (which is the root cause of the spiral in serials prices
and library cancellations). Authors’ selection of journals
needs to be irrespective of cost. Funding is available, for example,
from the US National Science Foundation for page charges in not-for-profit
journals; commercial publishers can’t participate in this.
If funding were available, the model could change.
• Some obstacles to OA are intractable, such as subsidising
rejected authors. Some publishers using the subscription model
already make a great deal of material freely available, even including
preprints of articles ‘in press’ immediately upon
acceptance, while at the same time rejecting 90% of submitted
manuscripts on the first round of peer review. How can they cover
costs and avoid the pressure to publish low-quality material?
• Perhaps only high-prestige journals can charge handling
fees as well as publication charges. High-prestige journals would
become the most expensive, in contrast with the current position.
Summary
We need to discuss with JISC and lobby worldwide.
Converting
an existing journal to open access
Raym Crow, Consultant to SPARC and Open Society Institute
OSI has focused on how to do this, not why. There is no single
‘right’ model – may need to experiment with
hybrids to raise enough revenue. Article publication fees could
include fees for submission, page charges or charges for colour
illustrations. Such fees for scientific publications are more
common in US than in Europe. Could be discretionary, e.g. Entomological
Society of America (see above). Alternatively, institutions could
pay a ‘membership fee’ based on their size; then their
authors don’t have to pay publication fees (BioMed Central
does this).Discussion points
Costs to authors of serial rejections could be considerable. Would
this compromise academic freedom? However, authors already make
huge investments of time and emotion for each submission. If levying
submission charges, could give partial refund if paper rejected.
• Offprint sales to author. Provide (for a charge) a PDF
‘reprint’ before publication. Could have embargo on
further use – but is this at odds with OA? (Alternatively,
provide author with PDF as part of OA charge, and encourage them
to post it on their own website.) Southampton University is evaluating
the views of academics from different disciplines on the usefulness
of preprint servers. Some journals will not publish papers that
have appeared on these. Some academics also feel uncomfortable
about publishing pre-prints.
• Institutional site licence. Although this sounds odd for
an OA journal, it has been done. The library buys a licence to
distribute via ILL, digital reserve etc. Since the journal is
already available freely, compliance is voluntary! The licence
could be bundled with the price for the printed version, and could
include the right to copy files for archive onto the library’s
server. An odd concept.
• Online advertising. Workability and acceptability strongly
variable by discipline (BioMed Central gets about 20% of its revenue
from this, charging advertisers by click-through. Also an important
revenue source for BioMedNet.). Ads need to be relevant to readers.
Questions raised about viability of model, given experience of
web ad failure to perform to expectations. Options to look at
classified ads as a revenue source.
• Sponsorship. A corporate sponsor subsidises an OA journal’s
operating expenses in exchange for recognition. This may raise
issues of scholarly impartiality. Would need to collaborate with
a cluster of several sponsors and use them in a cycle, in order
to avoid the inevitable vulnerability of relying on just one.
It would be interesting to know how the Journal of Clinical Investigation’s
sponsorship by Merck is regarded. Existing journals might find
it easier to attract sponsors, which could therefore contribute
to the cost of transition to OA.
• Convenience format licences. Charge online intermediaries
for delivery of content in a format that is convenient to them.
This needs a critical mass of content. Some online distributors
would be prepared to pay a considerable amount for this service.
Publishers might find it worthwhile to form consortia to sell
such annual licences. (Organisations might well be prepared to
pay, even in an OA world, for indexing, aggregation and packaging.)
This is an extension of the secondary publishing model.
For example, BioMed Central's content goes into Ovid, who pays
for it.
• Differentiated offline version. The online version would
be free, coupled with feebased distribution of an offline version.
The latter could be archival-quality print (perhaps cumulatively
at the end of the year), together with non-research content not
included in the online version.
• Premium online version. Fee-based access to a version
with additional functionality or content (ELPS – electronic
long, paper short), or fee based on what additional functionality
the user is prepared to pay for.
Discussion points
Could charge for access to underlying data. Perhaps little chance
of attracting such revenue from individuals. It might work if
it could be tailored for a niche market. It was also noted that
a recent survey indicated many scientists did not necessarily
value ‘added value’ (though ALPSP survey showed the
opposite).
• Subsidies. A foundation or government funds the transition
to OA, and/or establishes an endowment, or institutions pay other
types of contributions or subsidies.
Overall
conclusions
Perhaps surprisingly, those present seemed to agree that the OA
model was inherently appealing and potentially more sustainable
than the subscription model. The two main points of concern were
(a) how much would you need to charge to remain viable? and (b)
how would you manage the migration from one model to the other?
Some delegates expressed interest in experimenting with conversion
of one or more existing journals to OA, possibly with assistance
from SPARC and/or JISC. ALPSP agreed to pursue further discussions
with both organisations.
TOP
|
