[GOAL] Re: Bullish Report on Elsevier, Pooh-Poohing Boycott Threats

[Alicia López Medina]

Yes, but not only, in my oppinion.

Mandates are needed but it is not enough if they are not accompanied by 
the change ofthe evaluation criteria of scientific production in the 
institution (ISI beeing the MOST important criteria for promotion) . It 
is perverse for the researcher to mandate self-archiving without giving 
any value to it for his/her career. Until the institution do not 
accountfor the promotion of researchers the articles in open access 
repositories, and the scientific value of the article recognition come 
from the journal where it is published, we will not see significant 
green OA progress, and that includes, therefore, a change in the ways of 
certifying science, where lays the real power of journals.


Alicia López Medina
National Distance Education University of Spain. Library.







El 07/02/2012 4:55, Stevan Harnad escribió:
> Bullish report on Elsevier, despite boycott threats.
>
> Now, enough of the hoopla, please, and let's get back to the only thing that really matters, concretely, for OA today:
>
> Institutions and funders mandating green OA self-archiving!
>
> Stevan Harnad
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> Forwarded with permission
>> To:<liblicense-l at listserv.crl.edu>:
>> Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 19:47:24 -0500
>>
>> Sami Kassab sami.kassab at exane.com
>>
>> Bonjour,  Please find our report on Reed Elsevier released this
>> morning. We argue that:
>>
>> * Noise around boycott against Elsevier offers short term trading opportunity
>>
>> Reed Elsevier was the worst performing media stock last week. We
>> believe this is due to investor concerns on the back of T. Gowers'
>> petition to boycott publishing and refereeing in Elsevier's journals.
>> We believe the share price reaction was overdone and recommend buying
>> the shares.
>>
>> * Scientists are boycotting the boycott
>>
>> Similar petitions in favour of Open Access were organised in 2000 and
>> 2007, with no impact on Elsevier's fundamentals. Our tracking not only
>> shows that this latest petition lags behind the two preceding ones but
>> also suggests that its momentum is slowing. Fewer than 5,000
>> scientists have signed up, whereas Elsevier works with more than 6m
>> scientists worldwide. The low take-up of this petition is a sign of
>> the scientific community's improving perception of Elsevier.
>>
>> * Open Access unlikely to hurt financials in the medium term and is priced in
>>
>> The proportion of Open Access is growing at less than 1% pa.
>> Elsevier's contract lengths are getting longer and the company's
>> growth efforts are focused on new products rather than pricing. Open
>> Access is unlikely to hurt Elsevier in the next five years and the
>> longer term risk is more than priced in, in our view
>>
>> * Results are due on 16 February
>>
>> We expect EPS11e of 47p, slightly ahead of the consensus 46p, and an
>> outlook supportive of the group's defensive growth profile and
>> improved fundamentals. The announcement of a new CFO and a possible
>> share buyback could be two additional positives. Reed Elsevier PLC
>> trades on EV/EBIT12e of 8.8x. It offers defensive growth at a
>> reasonable price. We remain buyers of the stock on the current share
>> price weakness.
>>
>> Many thanks for your interest in our research!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sami Kassab/Exane Paribus
>
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL at eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>