3 ms·

A quick google search quickly shows you are either uninformed or lying. Elsevier margin is at least 37% in 2018 and its profit has increased in 2022. https://w

A quick google search quickly shows you are either uninformed or lying. Elsevier margin is at least 37% in 2018 and its profit has increased in 2022. https://www.relx.com/~/media/Files/R/RELX-Group/documents/press-releases/2019/relx-results-2018-pressrelease.pdf https://www.relx.com/~/media/Files/R/RELX-Group/documents/pr... Most journal reviewers and editors are academics who do the work as public service, i.e. free. Even top spots like editor in chief only get an honorarium of maybe 10k a year. Considering these people are the top of their field and can easily command 6-7 figures salary at minimum, that amount is nothing. Only very few journals have full time editors and even those end up relying on the volunteers to vet and review articles. A full time professor is expected to be an editor for some journals. And these academics make up the bulk of "journal editors". But they would not list it as their jobs. I suspect that is why if you look for "editor jobs" you will get lobsided salary ranges that doesn't reflect reality.

cpncrunch 3y ago
We are talking here about the (net) profit margin, not the operating margin. The link you gives confirms the net margin is 19%. Please delete or edit the unfounded personal attack in your comment, as it is uncivil and inappropriate for this forum.
- tomohelix 3y ago
  So now we are hiding behind semantics? If 942M is 37% operating profit then with a tax rate of 22% the net profit is still 29% for the publishing arm. Still way higher than 19%. You are confusing the parent company with the publishing part for that 19%, which is the main subject here. You are uninformed.
  - cpncrunch 3y ago
    No, the difference between operating profit and net profit is not simply tax. It is not "semantics". The net profit is the actual profit of the company. I see you haven't removed your personal attack above, so this is the end of the discussion. You clearly cannot argue logically and civilly, so it's a waste of time.
- jimnotgym 3y ago
  Whatever, it does not imply that any part of that expense is editorial. In fact it could be lobbying costs, marketing and sales. Or the cost of maintaining the paywalled system, and copyright lawyers. The www was quite literally designed for sharing scientific papers. Hosting them is a 1990s problem. The real cost is in building a paywall and enforcing it

cpncrunch 3y ago

We are talking here about the (net) profit margin, not the operating margin. The link you gives confirms the net margin is 19%. Please delete or edit the unfounded personal attack in your comment, as it is uncivil and inappropriate for this forum.

tomohelix 3y ago
So now we are hiding behind semantics? If 942M is 37% operating profit then with a tax rate of 22% the net profit is still 29% for the publishing arm. Still way higher than 19%. You are confusing the parent company with the publishing part for that 19%, which is the main subject here. You are uninformed.
- cpncrunch 3y ago
  No, the difference between operating profit and net profit is not simply tax. It is not "semantics". The net profit is the actual profit of the company. I see you haven't removed your personal attack above, so this is the end of the discussion. You clearly cannot argue logically and civilly, so it's a waste of time.
jimnotgym 3y ago
Whatever, it does not imply that any part of that expense is editorial. In fact it could be lobbying costs, marketing and sales. Or the cost of maintaining the paywalled system, and copyright lawyers. The www was quite literally designed for sharing scientific papers. Hosting them is a 1990s problem. The real cost is in building a paywall and enforcing it