Jeffrey "Ignoratio elenchi"? That's from Harry Potter, right? Spell meaning 'facts be gone'?
Heather is interested in the flow of money out of academia. If that is your area of interest then the profit margins of large commercial, legacy publishers are clearly of more interest than the profit margins of other players. From the figures I quote (from your blog), Hindawi takes $300 of profit from each paper it publishers. A large commercial, legacy publisher takes about $1200*. From where I sit (and I admit my knowledge of economics is almost as bad as that of Latin) it is clear that $1200 per paper is a significantly larger amount than $300 per paper and there is no way the figures back up your contention that 'It appears that the money is just moving from one set of publishers to another.' David *My conservative guess - happy to have people with access to the figures correct this. It's basically 30% of $4000 On 3 Oct 2013, at 23:04, Beall, Jeffrey wrote: > David, > > Thank you for your ignoratio elenchi. > > --Jeffrey > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of > David Prosser > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 3:03 PM > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Scholars jobs not publisher profits > > Jeffrey > > in the comment section to your post Ahmed Hindawi points out that the average > revenue per paper published by Hindawi is about $600. For people like > Elsevier it is in excess of $4000 per paper. I think it is clear which > publisher is taking (significantly) more money out of the system. > > David > > > > > On 3 Oct 2013, at 20:31, Beall, Jeffrey wrote: > > > Heather: > > I’ve documented that Hindawi’s profit margin is higher than Elsevier’s. So, I > am correct in assuming that you include Hindawi in your advice below, no? > Also, it’s been revealed that a number of the higher ups at PLOS are drawing > salaries of over a quarter-million dollars a year, and one was even drawing a > salary of over a half-million dollars. It appears that the money is just > moving from one set of publishers to another. > > Thanks, > > Jeffrey Beall > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of > Heather Morrison > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 11:43 AM > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Scholars jobs not publisher profits > > My reaction to the EBSCO report on expected ongoing high price increases by > some in the scholarly publishing sector at the same time that academics at my > alma mater have been asked to consider voluntary severance has been posted to > my blog: > http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.ca/2013/10/scholars-lets-keep-our-jobs-and-ditch.html > > My conclusion: > > It is time for scholars, university administrators and research funders to > wake up and realize that creation of new knowledge is done by researchers, > not publishers. Don't give up your job or or let your colleagues give up > theirs without demanding that the large commercial scholarly publishers give > up their 30-40% profit margins. > > best, > > -- > Dr. Heather Morrison > Assistant Professor > École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies > University of Ottawa > > http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html > heather.morri...@uottawa.ca > > ALA Accreditation site visit scheduled for 30 Sept-1 Oct 2013 / > Visite du comité externe pour l'accréditation par l'ALA est prévu le 30 > sept-1 oct 2013 > > http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/accreditation.html > http://www.esi.uottawa.ca/accreditation.html > > > > <ATT00001..txt> > > <ATT00001..txt>
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
