Springer Acquires Open Access Publisher BioMed Central
Andrew Albanese -- Library Journal, 10/8/2008
- Financial terms not released
- Will BMC author fees rise?
- Springer CEO says open access a viable model
| Go back to the Academic Newswire for more stories |
(This article first appeared in the Oct. 7, 2008 issue of the LJ Academic Newswire.)
In a major—if not unexpected—deal, Springer, the world’s second largest publisher of commercial STM (science, technology, and medicine) journals, has acquired pioneering for-profit open access (OA) publisher BioMed Central (BMC). Financial terms were not disclosed.
On the balance sheet, adding BioMed Central would seem to be a very minor deal for Springer; BioMed Central publishes some 193 open access journals with revenues of roughly $24.5 million, while Springer publishes over 1700 journals in addition to 5500 new books annually, with revenues nearly $1.25 billion. It is a significant event in the history of open access publishing, however, as a leading commercial publisher has now expressed confidence in a business model once deemed, at best, experimental, and often called untenable.
“This acquisition reinforces the fact that we see open access publishing as a sustainable part of STM publishing, and not an ideological crusade,” Derk Haank, CEO of Springer Science Business Media, said in a statement, adding that the company’s experience with its version of OA, Springer Open Choice in 2004, has been positive. “This acquisition strengthens Springer’s position in the life sciences and biomedicine,” he said, “and will allow us to offer societies a greater range of publishing options.”
OA Validation
On his Open Access Blog, OA advocate Peter Suber noted the importance of Springer's embrace of OA. “If Derk Haank says that OA publishing is a ‘sustainable part of STM publishing,’ then it’s harder for anyone to say that it isn’t,” Suber observed. “That includes the publishing lobby, which for years has played on fears of unsustainability in its campaign to derail or dilute national commitments to OA for publicly-funded research."
Do Haank’s words indicate a new phase for open access publishing—has OA has moved from “experimental” to a viable, commercial business? “Yes, and no,” Suber told the LJ Academic Newswire. “If BMC’s business model makes sense today, then it made sense all along. What’s new is the confidence of an erstwhile skeptic. And the confidence is strong: not just public words but money.”
If Haank’s confidence in OA publishing is somewhat eye-opening, the deal itself is no surprise. Industry watchers have long expected that BMC founder Vitek Tracz was building up to a sale, much as he did when he sold BioMedNet to Elsevier in 1996. While at Elsevier, meanwhile, Haank was rather agnostic about the future of OA, supporting “green” self-archiving policies. When he joined Springer, Haank hired BMC’s first CEO, Jan Velterop, in 2005, and Velterop oversaw the company’s initial foray into open access publishing, Open Choice, before leaving for KnewCo in March 2008.
As an upstart business, BMC has had its growing pains. The company, founded in 2000, had yet to turn a profit, instead choosing to bet on a longer-term strategy of growing its publishing program and OA. Although BMC individual author charges more than doubled in recent years, it kept its author processing charges (APCs) below the rates of its competitors, a strategy that helped yield significant growth in submission rates and articles published, if not short-term profits. Meanwhile, open access itself has gained wider support in the academic community.
What’s next?
The question now, is will BMC have more of an effect on the way commercial giant Springer publishes, or vice versa. For example, will BMC’s APCs skew toward Springer Open Choice’s $3000 figure? Or, on the other hand will BMC’s open access model affect Springer’s current brand of OA, which mandates that authors transfer their copyrights and limits redistribution.
“It’s a good question, and I can’t guess at the answer,” Suber told the LJ Academic Newswire. Suber also wondered whether other major STM firms would look to acquire OA publishers, or whether Springer will use its “corporate muscle” to lobby on behalf of OA. “I’ll be following developments closely," he said, "and I hope lots of other people will too.” However it works out, Suber blogged, “get used to saying it: Springer is now the world’s largest OA publisher.”
Read more Newswire stories:
ArXiv, Pioneering Online Scientific Repository Hits Major Milestone
Annoyed Yet? Annoyed Librarian Blog Moves to LJ.com
Library Journal Seeks Nominations for 2009 Movers & Shakers
People
