3 ms·
We have two related strategies: 1) Charge a small submission fee (still pinning down the number). Journals will have the option of paying that fee directly or
by robertwalsh0 15y ago
We have two related strategies:
1) Charge a small submission fee (still pinning down the number). Journals will have the option of paying that fee directly or passing the fee along to the authors who submit the articles. If the journals choose to charge the author, they will keep a portion of that fee.
2) Give journal editors the option to charge for their content. Individual journals may set the price or charge nothing. If they charge, Scholastica will take a small, very reasonable cut.
Regardless of where we end up, we definitely want to monetize it in a way that doesn't place unnecessary strain on library budgets and allows everyone to access the content at a reasonable price.
- mrlase 15y agoJust giving you some feedback from someone working in a (virology) research lab so I'd say I have a fair idea of what academia is like. My biggest question is, how do you plan on gaining traction to bring in credible editors that can actually challenge journals that have been around for decades in their respective fields? I would imagine that it is going to be very hard to change the mind of the more resistant peoples in academia (i.e. the older crowd that has been using the same journals their entire career) who actually control the money. How do you plan on attracting credible reviewers to review the submitted articles? In regards to your proposed pricing, isn't the entire idea for disruption of academic publishing to get rid of having to pay for articles?
- brador 15y agoThat last sentence makes you a social startup, nothing wrong with that, but harder to get funding. Consider your angles on this one. You potentially have a very wealthy, untapped, market ;)