Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Scholarly Open Access
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 10802

Comment on Would You Submit a Paper to This Publisher? by Smith and Franklin Academic Publishing Corporation, UK

0
0

Dear all,

Thanks for your time and comments. We really appreciate and respect this forum, kindly led by Jeffrey, because it’s worth considering. Certainly, we are not very happy with this post; however, we take this as an opportunity to underpin our weaknesses and to improve our services to the scientific community. Therefore, we request you to please take a look of our responses and give us your honest feedback. Please note that we are just 7 months old and can’t be compared directly with Nature or Oxford Journals. However, we are committed to scientific excellence and can assure you that we are legit.

Below are our 5 responses to these 5 questions raised here. You are welcome to ask any question in this matter because we believe in Openness in Open Access and we follow it.

1-As Jeffrey himself said, “I understand that companies can use any names they choose”, so as do we, like any other. Can you criticize on the choice of names? For example if we ask “Adrian Smith” why are you not Mikael Gill or other way around.

2- We have previously mentioned Jeffrey that we took a third party service for handling our post which reduces our cost significantly. Anyone in the world is welcome to confirm our existence using official British Company House website with following information and if have any doubt, please let us know.

Link: http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk//wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo

Company Name: SMITH AND FRANKLIN ACADEMIC PUBLISHING CORPORATION LTD

Or

Company number: 08492932

(After filling this information, click on Search and then SandF page)

When the company website and online submission system (eSubmit) was initiated, the founder was based in Sweden, therefore the domain was registered in Sweden. Anyone who know abc of website engineering knows that domain and hosting can be registered anywhere in the world where you get best services. We are missing the point of “Predatory” publishers here; does anyone think it matters for the authors where the publisher’s domain is registered when we know the domain is usually registered with third party?

Anyways for your clarification, our domain was registered with founder name that is now based in UK so as the domain. Our domain, hosting and cloud backup (every day backup) is provided by HostGator, which is one of the responsible and reputable hosting services in the market. All our articles, in all formats, are backed up offline, beside cloud backup, at two different places. If anyone need more information, you are welcome to ask.

3-Regarding comment about Business Model, we do believe that we will stain it and sustain it way better than charging Article Processing Charges.

IMPORTANTLY: We are just 7 months old and we already have 5 eSubmit customers. Funds from these so far have been enough to handle all expenses. I personally think, we should admire Smith and Franklin for this.

We are continuously been contacted by several publishers to use our economical and well-maintained eSubmit system. We charge very nominal fee, by the way, with full and 24 hours support. If any publishers reading this post and require this service, please do contact us at journals@smithandfranklin.com and write eSubmit in subject line. We will give you full training and 1-month free trial for one journal. (NB: we got the chance to advertise us here, thought not well reputed place to advertise, sorry for that).

SECONDLY: One should only object our business model if we leave any ambiguities. Can anyone in the world say that we charged APC despite claiming we will not? It is more important to note this fact than to where the charges come from. By saying this, we don’t criticise OA publishers who charge APC because it is down to them and that APCs are gold standards for OA. It is just that we have our own model.

4-We have previously mentioned that GooglePlay and other logos are placed because our developer continuously checking the application by placing links. We think, instead of using such logo for legitimate purposes, as was portrait, it is opposite that when author will click on these icons and will not find any application, this will certainly damage our reputation and we are aware of this. But it is required by developers. Anyways, we will be making these services available within a week by speeding up our process.

5-Most of the social media links are active and the one which are not such as link to YouTube can only be placed once we are stable enough to be framed. We continuously change our website/tabs to have better presentation. We apologise for any inconvenient this may cause and we will try our best to make them all active soon. But again, do you think not having proper few social media links will make a publisher “predator” forgetting and not realising the efforts those are putting to make the things running?


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 10802

Latest Images

Trending Articles





Latest Images