> There are a few administrative costs. The administrators get paid huge amounts.
I'll step over the part about these sentences contradicting each other. A colleague of mine worked as a part-time "managing editor" for the top journal in his field, meaning he was paid to coordinate the flow of submissions to the (unpaid) senior editors, managing the responsibilities/schedule of the editor-in-chief, and a host of other work I haven't quizzed him about. He worked hard, and for not much money, which is somewhat reasonable, as he was effectively an executive assistant. The EIC is expected to regularly travel to annual conferences (in one case, because that's when the journal's editorial board meets), so these costs are paid by the journal (to my understanding). He also does a great deal of evangelist work for the journal internationally. While some of these costs may be paid by honorariums (I'm not clear), they must be paid by somebody, and the journal is a likely candidate for a portion of those costs.
My point is that every time we talk about costs of journals, someone mentions either a) administration is a no cost event or b) administration is an overpriced event. Yes, the reviewing and editing is typically performed by volunteers (the costs of which are borne by their respective employers) There is a substantial amount of work that goes on behind the scenes. I've had only the slightest of peeks behind the curtain, and I'm blown away by how much occurs that I wouldn't have initially guessed.
I'm not saying the repository companies (and some publishers) are not money-grubbing parasites; I'm not sure the evidence is in their favor. But little though it's been, my limited view of journal administration is that it's a non-trivial set of tasks costing more than I originally suspected. Claiming otherwise without experience to the contrary is really just FUD.