[privong]

> Assumption 2: the cost of the subscriptions is passed on to the primary customers of the universities -- students.

This is not likely to be true. Most universities in the US take overheads on grants. So if you get a $20,000 grant, the university will often take up to $12,000 of that (usually it's in the $6000–8000 range), and the researcher uses the rest. That money in overheads is used for a variety of things, including supporting the research (i.e., paying for journal subscriptions).

> Question: Is there any correlation to be made between the profitability of such academic publishers with the astounding rise in university tuition in the US over the past three decades?

Journals are expensive, but they're not _that_ expensive. It's much more plausible that the rise in tuition can be linked to non-academic expenditures at universities, including athletic facilities (e.g., gyms for students), fancy dining halls and dorms, and non-academic staff. Maybe one could argue those aren't the drivers of high tuition, but I'd be surprised if a rise in journal costs were remotely comparable.

[nullc]

> Journals are expensive, but they're not _that_ expensive.

https://mako.cc/fun/overpricetags/

Would $25,888/yr for a single journal not count as '_that_ expensive'?

But I agree they're not likely a tuition driver. After all, institutions can simply drop subscriptions: they don't do much for attracting students compared to facilities.

[privong]

> Would $25,888/yr for a single journal not count as '_that_ expensive'?

For a journal cost, $25,888/yr is expensive, but no, it wouldn't count as "_that_ expensive". I meant "_that_ expensive" as "expensive enough to be a tuition driver".