 from the previous speaker for good and for worse. I'm going to talk about sustainability issues from a perspective of having founded a service 10 years ago and being away from that for the last, for a couple of years, but since January 1st came back not to Lund University where I were before, but as Managing Director of Open Access Journals. Very brief, I only have 10 minutes. It was founded 10 years ago at Lund University with 300 journals. Initially it was supported by minor project grants from Spark US and Open Society Institute. As a matter of fact, DOAJ has never received any in-kind contribution from Lund University. It has always been self-sustained and even has paid overhead to the university for the contributions that has been given during the years. There's been additional grants from other organizations like Spark Europe, ENAS, and the Swedish National Library Open Access Program, openaccess.se, but three years after the launch of the service we introduced a funding program based on institutional memberships and sponsoring. The situation in 2010, seven years after, was that the open access environment has changed radically. Open access has got momentum and for a single university it became difficult to manage. Manage this growing service and manage the increasing demands from the community, from funders and libraries and researchers. So there was a growing backlog. Therefore, we initiated discussions with Lund University, that was after I left, provided by a company we set up, not-for-profit company registered in the United Kingdom, founded by two familiar faces, for some of you at least here, Caroline Sutton, who was founder of Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association and Alma Sworn, a rather well-known open access advocate and my present colleague as director of Spark Europe, and myself. We set up this company which enabled us to get the rights from Lund University to continue this service. We got the rights to the brand and the domain and so forth. So we took over January 1st and initially launched many improvements to the service itself and as you can see from the latest numbers, it has grown to nearly 10,000 journals and as well more than 1.5 million article-level metadata records. What we have done since January 1st, we have streamlined the back office processes in terms of adding journals. So we have nearly doubled the speed, but I should say here related to the latest article in Science about open access journals, as it were. We have, during the last three months, actually removed as many titles as we have added. So coming closer to the funding, to the sustainability issue, here you have a slide telling about the resources that we use for staffing five part-time equivalent to three full-time equivalents. We have outsourced the maintenance and development to a Danish software company and we are working from Copenhagen, Malmö and Stockholm. Our current funding model is that we have memberships from academic libraries paying 400 pounds a year. We have about 100 of universities who are supporting us that way. We have a dozen or so library consortia paying 4,000 pounds a year and we have some commercial aggregators like subscription agents, discovery service providers as well paying 5,000 pounds a year and then we have sponsors, mainly open access journal publishers who are paying between 1,500 to 10,000 pounds a year and we have recently set up a donations facility using PayPal and there are small amounts coming in there. Expected turnover for this year is 200,000 pounds and the contributions from the community library and library consortia is two-third. Commercial aggregators 10% and sponsors, mainly the open access publishers, 25%. So far this funding model works more or less. We still have a backlog to fight but we can see during the years that the environment has changed. We have now drafted much more tighter criteria for inclusion in the DOA day. We are going to facilitate uptake of persistent identifiers for smaller open access journals and we are trying to facilitate archiving solutions and we'll try to facilitate contributions from the community, associate editors who should help us. The criteria we are launching is much more detailed, much more tight. They will allow publishers, they will allow funders and universities to determine much better whether a journal lives up to standards, enable the community to monitor compliance, addressing the issue of fake publishers and we will promote best purchase by means of the DOA day seal. I don't have time to go deeper in the criteria and that's not the purpose of this presentation but we'll address quality and openness and the delivery and the publishers will have to do much more to be included. This is a graph of the long tail of small open access publishers. We have rather few open access publishers with hundreds of journals but we have thousands of open access publishers with one or two journals and that's why we think we have to engage in assisting those journals, coming into the mainstream by, for instance, providing DOIs, fixing the archiving problem which means that our ambition is to grow into much more than a list and a hop for article-level major data. It's our mission as we see it not to point out fake publishers but to assist open access publishers to come into the mainstream and that requires work and that requires funding. Based on our calculations we will probably have to increase the funding for next year with about 50%. I think still this is possible but we of course would like as well to become part of what could be called an open access infrastructure package but while this work is going on and it is slowly starting, we will have to continue and develop the current funding while we are waiting for this to happen. So that was very brief about our sustainability issues. It is a struggle to getting libraries, universities and others to pay for a thing that everyone else gets for free but maybe have something to learn from Greece. Thank you. Questions at the end when all five experts.