...
- Question about why arXiv may need more revenues. Because the current budget is based on operational costs and does not factor in adding new features, revamping software, etc.
- Question about IT staffing. A few months ago, arXiv team decided not to migrate the browse component of arXiv to Invenio. There are a number of factors behind this decision. The main reasons for re-evaluation were slow progress by our team in the migration, an understanding that replication of arXiv functionality in Invenio involved rather more coding that we had earlier imagined, and pressure from our advisory board to address other issues. Instead of this large-scale migration we have decided to refocus our efforts on continuing to develop arXiv within its existing technology infrastructure and will reassess our strategy to use Invenio as platform for arXiv next year.
- Esther stated that German scientists like arXiv lean and simple, operated at low cost. We need to make a very clear case why extra money would be required. She said that if there were a "give button" on arXiv it would make sense to earmark and carefully communicate the use to which this money would be put. Better to have a specific project in mind that general support. Because we announced that we have a sustainability model in place, we need to be careful about explaning why we need additional funds. We need to be careful about not confusing scientists and also we don't want them to think that we are approaching both them and their institutions for funding.
- Question: Why is there a reserve fund? --> The purpose of the arXiv reserve fund is to support unexpected expenses to ensure a sound business model. This is a common practice for organizations to ensure funds needed for closing the business, covering unexpected expenses. Question: Are there any institutions with rank>200 who would be willing to pay if there were a lower tier? à We have not asked so we don't know. However we are aware that some institutions are finding even the lowest tier not affordable due to their budget challenges.
- Germany would like to have a more "fair" model (higher fees for the top tier uses) but understands the challenges in complicating the current system by introducing another detail that would require individual negotiations with the top users. Oya suggests that for next year's fees, we might include for very heavy users (top 10-20) an invitation to contribute additional funds due to their high use.
Action items:
- Cornell will draft a reserve funds proposal to seek more concrete advice from MAB.
Collaboration with Publishers and Societies
...