Elsevier profit

[Ann Okerson <ann.okerson@yale.edu>]

Reposted to liblicense-l at the request of several readers of other lists.
Mr. Michaelson's posting originally appeared on "chminf-l", "slapam"  and
"reedelscutomer".  Perhaps publishers on this list can explain to the
non-publishers just how to interpret such percentages (see also earlier
LJ NewsWire message re. Wiley).

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Robert Michaelson [mailto:rmichael@northwestern.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 10:17 AM
To: chminf-l@listserv.indiana.edu; slapam-l@lists.yale.edu;
reedelscustomers@lists.cc.utexas.edu
Subject: General: Elsevier profit rose 43% last year 
 
For those of you who want to know where your subscription dollars go -- 
they go to fatten up the fat (and getting fatter) cats at Reed-Elsevier.
 
I just learned of an article in the Wall Street Journal, Feb 21, 2003.
Under the headline "Business Brief -- Reed Elsevier: Subscription Revenue
Credited For Bolstering Net Profit 43%"

The article reports that Reed-Elsevier "buoyed by strong subscription
revenue for its science and medical publications, reported sharply higher
net profits and predicted double-digit per-share earnings growth this
year".
 
Bob Michaelson
Seeley G. Mudd Library for Science and Engineering
Northwestern University
Evanston, Illinois  60208
USA
rmichael@northwestern.edu