You may look into these similar discussions: https://www.researchgate.net/post/A_research_paper_costs_more_to_publish_than_a_Car

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is-it-quite-the-same-a-predatory-journal-and-a-journal-that-charges-for-publishing

https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_ACTUAL_COST_OF_A_PUBLICATION

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_know_the_journals_which_paid_royalties_to_authors

https://www.researchgate.net/post/List-of-journals-with-no-publishing-fees

Takele -

Holding down costs might be difficult, but I expect that the internet not only makes this a bit easier for online-only journals, but also makes them more accessible. Still, there are costs involved, and intangible benefits. There are predatory journals, and in the past, to my way of thinking, a few publishers who have held too much power over authors, which I think might be changing now. Good referees may be even harder to find as more outlets emerge. Change is upon us, and that means good and bad, but I think that the good will outweigh the bad, though situations will differ.

You can put a lot of work on ResearchGate, and this itself then becomes a good outlet. (There are dangers. I recently clicked on "read" on my phone to see who had recently 'read' my latest update to a project for which I have 23 updates - ResearchGate says it is 24 - and have worked on over nearly two years, and I got a message back asking if I was certain that I wanted to completely delete my entire project. ... No! ... So things that seem permanent on the internet can potentially be lost, one way or another.)

Sometimes a publisher will wave the charge if the author's organization won't pay. Sometimes there is a reduced charge. It is also important that you know the reputation of the publisher. They definitely have an interest in the process.

By the way, remember that ResearchGate is free for researchers.

Best wishes - Jim

Thanks Jim

I know that there are costs associated with internet service and administrative stuffs to handle the review and publication works. My complain is do not put all the costs and burdens on the authors and do not make reviewers to work without a nominal fee which if paid will encourage them to spend more of their time on the revising process and in the meantime this enhances the quality of the paper. Let propose something, if the journal typically asks for $2000 for APC if the journal waived 40% of APC for the author because journals hardly would have a job if there is no submission and the authors spent their precious resources while writing the papers. Moreover, let the publishers be generous enough to pay 15% for reviewers and they can use the remaining 55% for themselves.

Sorry, the ratio of APC income sharing is 40:15:45 for authors, reviewers and publishers, respectively.

Its a worrisome issue. Some journals are really charging a lot in the name of APC.

The paper publication has now turned into a lucrative business by the publishers fueled by the demands from institutions that evaluate the performance of practising educators and consider them for promotion by the number of their publications.

Several university ranking procedures has also contributed to the business model. they demand a certain number of publications in the high ranking journals for an institute to be ranked to a certain level. Graduation requirements have also facilitated this boom in paid publications as the publishers prey on desperate candidates who will do anything to meet the graduation requirements set by universities.

It is not a fair game I believe, except in the case of conferences where the organisers pool together researchers of common research interests to a central or common venue to facilitate networking among researchers. the costs are justified and in most cases acceptable.

"but ignoring authors and reviewers from sharing the financial benefits might be not acceptable" - absolutely agreed.