The issue is that some people appear to be delusional thinking that their research matters to society. If anything, finance research is a net negative as the wasted resources in producing these articles could have been used for productive purposes. Being part of finance academia is like competing at donkey kong or any other game, we all appear take it seriously but at the end of the day it is a game that serves nobody but ourselves. Then there are fraudsters like myself who accept the fact that the research I do is meaningless and exploit weaknesses in the system to appear productive enough to keep my faculty position.
Cheap FRL
-
some of my colleagues who got multiple rejections from and failed to publish a single article in journals like Global Finance Journal, Quarterly Journal of Finance, Managerial Finance etc. were able to publish 4/5 articles in FRL in just 1 year. That tells me a lot about the quality of FRL. Fraud journal run my mafias.
-
The people that trash FRL have no idea of what they are talking about. I applaud user 47AF for his constructive comment. Now, have you ever thought why FRL currently has the highest impact factor in the field? All of those years that the editors of the top journals in finance (not just the top 3 but top 10 or so) were very unwilling to (i) accept papers coming from modest institutions, (ii) accept more than 8 papers per quarter, (iii) accept non- corporate finance and asset pricing papers, such as fintech, cryptocurrencies, etc., FRL was there supporting those that needed publications to be granted tenure. Those people that publish at FRL are actually the ones that care about the profession the most, while the 20-25 people that consistently publish in the top journals are the people that destroyed it because they only cared about themselves for decades. So, if you are bad mouthing FRL, maybe it is time to stop. It is a journal that reflects the work of the average finance researcher that has average resources.
-
The people that trash FRL have no idea of what they are talking about. I applaud user 47AF for his constructive comment. Now, have you ever thought why FRL currently has the highest impact factor in the field? All of those years that the editors of the top journals in finance (not just the top 3 but top 10 or so) were very unwilling to (i) accept papers coming from modest institutions, (ii) accept more than 8 papers per quarter, (iii) accept non- corporate finance and asset pricing papers, such as fintech, cryptocurrencies, etc., FRL was there supporting those that needed publications to be granted tenure. Those people that publish at FRL are actually the ones that care about the profession the most, while the 20-25 people that consistently publish in the top journals are the people that destroyed it because they only cared about themselves for decades. So, if you are bad mouthing FRL, maybe it is time to stop. It is a journal that reflects the work of the average finance researcher that has average resources.
Super comment.
-
The people that trash FRL have no idea of what they are talking about. I applaud user 47AF for his constructive comment. Now, have you ever thought why FRL currently has the highest impact factor in the field? All of those years that the editors of the top journals in finance (not just the top 3 but top 10 or so) were very unwilling to (i) accept papers coming from modest institutions, (ii) accept more than 8 papers per quarter, (iii) accept non- corporate finance and asset pricing papers, such as fintech, cryptocurrencies, etc., FRL was there supporting those that needed publications to be granted tenure. Those people that publish at FRL are actually the ones that care about the profession the most, while the 20-25 people that consistently publish in the top journals are the people that destroyed it because they only cared about themselves for decades. So, if you are bad mouthing FRL, maybe it is time to stop. It is a journal that reflects the work of the average finance researcher that has average resources.
Good comment. FRL is for the other 99%. The HRMs have their network, but we have the journal with the IF.
-
It has an impact factor higher than JF, RFS, and JFE. Clearly something fraudulent going on.
The publisher Elsevier is part of a publicly traded company. I cannot believe that let this type of fraud take place.They are basically just approaching the journal game from a strategic perspective.
Short article > more likely to be read and thus cited
Quick turnaround > more likely to attract submissions on hot/current issues
Hot/current issues > more likely to be cited by others in top journals who do it thoroughly in 2-3 years as you have to cite everything these days or get called on for it
It's basically taxis in 2012 complaining about uber when taxis provide shitty service and fail to understand why people choose to take an uber.Excellent summary
-
some of my colleagues who got multiple rejections from and failed to publish a single article in journals like Global Finance Journal, Quarterly Journal of Finance, Managerial Finance etc. were able to publish 4/5 articles in FRL in just 1 year. That tells me a lot about the quality of FRL. Fraud journal run my mafias.
Yeah okay, go out your tinfoil hat back on. I bet you think 9-11 was perpetrated by vampires from area 51 too, huh?