I agree that OA vs non OA isn't the argument, and that there are examples of OA journals with a particular focus on "impact", like eLife. My point is really abo

I agree that OA vs non OA isn't the argument, and that there are examples of OA journals with a particular focus on "impact", like eLife. My point is really about megajournal-style peer review vs traditional peer review. But in the press these two things get conflated, and when referencing how cheap publishing should be people always quote the lower price of megajournal APCs and not the higher price of traditionally peer reviewed journal APCs. But it is worth noting that a move to APCs dramatically changes the incentive structure for a publisher, and there are built-in mechanisms in such a system to produce new strange dynamics that we haven't really seen much of before (ie the tension between needing to accept a certain volume to stay in business vs try to keep the reputation of the journal high).