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/