From: Heather Morrison <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 19:13:54 -0800

Elsevier's Alicia Wise wrote:

Early indications show the NIH Public Access Policy has had a negative
impact on Elsevier and other publishers.  We have experienced a modest
reduction of usage (by subscribers) and transactional sales (for non
subscribers) for articles on our publishing platform after they are
placed on PubMed Central even with links to the published journal
article.

Comment:

According to the Elsevier November 2011 Management Statement, Erik
Engstrom, Reed Elsevier CEO, said:

"The trading performance for the first nine months in Reed Elsevier's
five business areas was as follows:
Elsevier: underlying revenue growth of 2%. Science & Technology grew
4% with solid subscription revenues in research and continued good
growth in databases and tools...The financial position of Reed
Elsevier is strong with good cash generation."

That's 2 to 4% revenue growth on top of over 1 billion in PROFIT in
2010, a 36% profit margin (see the Economist article).

Question for Alicia: how can you reconcile a 2-4% growth in revenue
from a base of over a billion in profit, a 36% profit margin, with the
NIH Public Access Act having a negative impact on Elsevier? I would
submit that Elsevier is not showing any indications of any kind of
negative impact at all, from any source.

References:

Reed Elsevier November 2011 Interim Management Statement:  from:

 http://www.reedelsevier.com/mediacentre/pressreleases/2011/Pages/interim-management-statement-november-2011.aspx

Of goats and headaches. The economics, May 26 2011:

http://www.economist.com/node/18744177

best,

Heather Morrison

http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com/