This is a pretty good report and appears to make a genuine effort to be even-handed and fair. It is based on a study of and comparison between hundreds of open access and commercial journals. It becomes apparent that the open access movement is young, rough around the edges, not as polished or rigorous as the commercial sector, and not as profitable. Yet, despite this, commercial publishers view open access negatively, some citing the potential for "devastating losses" (publishers of open access journals see the situation quite differently). If I had to offer any criticism of this report, it would be that the metrics are derived from traditional publishing rather than online publishing. For example, the traditional community's reliance on editing and peer review is offset in the online world by immediacy and post-publication review, factors not considered in the report. Via Seb Schmoller.