From: Jan Velterop <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 09:45:10 +0200

I'm quite surprised that 'journals' is still the unit of thought.
Surely, it's the number of articles published that counts?

Jan Velterop

Sent from my iPad

On 26 Jul 2012, at 23:28, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Sally Morris <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 11:02:17 +0100
>
> According to my calculations in 2007, the top 5 (now 4) publishers
> (Elsevier, Springer, T&F, Blackwell & Wiley) published nearly 25% of the
> journals in Ulrichs (about half of these on behalf of nonprofit
> organisations).
>
> In 1993 David Brown used figures supplied by BH Blackwell which indicated
> that 117 'large' publishers (out of a total of 17531) published 17086 (20%)
> of a total of 34833 journals.
>
> Sally Morris
> South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing
> West Sussex, UK  BN13 3UU
> Email:  [log in to unmask]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 20:33:00 -0700
>
> Nothing new in this article for members of this list, but rather surprising
> for its length.
>
> Can anyone untangle the numbers?  Harvard's journals budget looks incredibly
> low.  Also, 50% of all journals are published by a small number of
> commercial publishers?  50% of the dollars, perhaps, but 50% of the titles?
>
> Joe Esposito
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 6:04 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> From: "B.G. Sloan" <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 12:16:53 -0700
>>
>> Some of you may be interested in this article from U.S. News & World
> Report:
>>
>> Owens, Simon. Is the Academic Publishing Industry on the Verge of
> Disruption?
>>
>> "As Harvard balks at subscription cost and others take a page from its
>> book, open access publishers get a fresh look."
>>
>> Full text at: http://bit.ly/Ofn7kH
>>
>> Bernie Sloan