[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: GENERAL: Elsevier Science Friction?
- To: <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: GENERAL: Elsevier Science Friction?
- From: "David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 19:32:39 EDT
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
I have learned not to pay much attention to the reports of stock analysts on Elsevier and other science publishers. There reports are preswumably of some value to their intended audience, who decide whether to buy or sell on the basis of theshort-term events which are typically the basis for the analysis. We who are science librarians, like those who are with the companies concerned, are more interested in the long-term events, and in the prospects for these companies over the next 3 or 5 or 10 years. We are also in a better position to judge them: we do not subscribe to journals from day to day, but from year to year (and sometimes, usually to our regret, for longer periods). The prospects for Elsevier and other publishers rest on the decisions that authors make in deciding where to send their papers, and --to a much lesser extent--on the decisions we make in deciding how to provide access. Elsevier's ScienceDirect model in its original form might perhaps have succeeded even better if the company had been less concerned with guaranteeing revenue and profits from year to year. It would also have succeeded equally, regardless of their business and pricing practices, if we as librarians had decided to emphasize paying for their journals at the expense of all other publishers. It would have succeeded best of all if authors in all subjects had preferred to send their best papers to Elsevier journals, raather than to the journals of the professional societies. I neither know nor care how Elsevier's profits will do next year as compared to this year--and I have no reason to. My journal selection was not done on that basis. I do care whether Elsevier's best journals will continue to succeed over the next decade, despite the potential changes in science publishing. (And I care similarly for every publisher's good journals.) I judged my journal selection at that time scale, and I teach my students to do likewise. It is even possible that those who work there judge their career prospects on the same time basis. Please excuse the duplicate reply, if you read the original posting on another list first. Dr. David Goodman Associate Professor Palmer School of Library and Information Science Long Island University email@example.com Please excuse the duplicate reply, if you read the original posting on another list first. -----Original Message----- From: firstname.lastname@example.org on behalf of Ann Okerson Sent: Tue 10/19/2004 7:19 PM To: email@example.com Subject: GENERAL: Elsevier Science Friction? Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:01:03 -0500 From: Robert Michaelson <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: GENERAL: Elsevier Science Friction? Please excuse duplicate posting. The Times (United Kingdom) has an article from October 8, 2004: ... Bob Michaelson Northwestern University Library Evanston, Illinois 60208 USA email@example.com