Close

Complete Captcha

• 1 year - 96 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 105 Goods vs 73 No Goods

1. Economist
   5857
   

   I agree with your point. However, why do we need to get only one journal out of top 3. Do you think that journal has no corruption/cronyism? Having 3 solid journal outside of top 3 is better in this case.

   I don’t see the point. The problem is not about these three journals, but corruption and cronyism in JF, RFS, and JFE. There are excellent papers, often better that those published in the top three, that are rejected because they are unlucky with bad referees or written by noname authors. There are also poor quality papers that are accepted in the top three for some crazy reasons. Having another journal that is equally respectable as the top three is important so that the monopoly of the three becomes weaker.

   why can't we just agree that MS=JFQA=ROF and all of them can be counted for tenure? This is a win-win for everyone. We think finance people are smart. No, we are not. We keep fighting with each other.
   

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

2. Economist
   0c39
   

   Finance Research Letters is certainly up there. They are leading the field in FinTech

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 1 Vlad !

3. Economist
   7d6d
   

   At this point, I feel like this RF thing is a joke I just do not get.

   Bear with me, I am older. I have published in JFE, RFS, JFQA, MS, plus some Bs (JCF, JBF and down that list).

   Yet, RF has never been on my radar, until I came here. I have never submitted there. I have never, ever, cited a paper in RF. I have never submitted to RF. I have never interviewed someone with an RF. None of my colleagues has ever published in that journal. It is not on our target list (we are top 50, but barely), nor it has, frankly, any value towards our tenure process.

   So what am I missing? Is this the longest troll in the history of forums? Or is this journal really valued somewhere? Is this a Europe vs USA thing?

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 1 Vlad !

4. Economist
   f52b
   

   MS is the best

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

5. Economist
   406e
   

   At this point, I feel like this RF thing is a joke I just do not get.
   Bear with me, I am older. I have published in JFE, RFS, JFQA, MS, plus some Bs (JCF, JBF and down that list).
   Yet, RF has never been on my radar, until I came here. I have never submitted there. I have never, ever, cited a paper in RF. I have never submitted to RF. I have never interviewed someone with an RF. None of my colleagues has ever published in that journal. It is not on our target list (we are top 50, but barely), nor it has, frankly, any value towards our tenure process.
   So what am I missing? Is this the longest troll in the history of forums? Or is this journal really valued somewhere? Is this a Europe vs USA thing?

   I am an AP in US and I agree with this summary: no one in our department ~rank 150 has publishes in RF or submits to RF. Like you said it’s not even on the radar. I assume this is a Europe thing. That said, when you look at the journal it has some pubs from famous people but these pubs are not serious research. Look at the recent paper by John. It’s interesting, but it’s just an essay.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

6. Economist
   f7fc
   

   why the debate?

   RF << JFQA=MS, at least for all the people I know

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 0 Vlad !

7. Economist
   c7ac
   

   RF used to be called European finance review, house journal of European FA. Hence the pro Euro bias. They ditched the euro name to compete for general interest about 15 years ago-ish. AE (LBS) has tried valiantly to make it a top journal and some European schools have decided to count it as top-3 equivalent, effectively trying to push it by creating a temporary arbitrage for some of their juniors. I feel like that backfired though since RF tried to become better by effectivel rejecting every single paper by juniors and soliciting semi dead WPs from seniors.

   It's unbelievably hard to improve a journal at the top and these processes are very sticky. I guess MS has the best claim to being a top since it is considered an A across the entire BSchool, which ultimately made the difference.

   At this point, I feel like this RF thing is a joke I just do not get.
   Bear with me, I am older. I have published in JFE, RFS, JFQA, MS, plus some Bs (JCF, JBF and down that list).
   Yet, RF has never been on my radar, until I came here. I have never submitted there. I have never, ever, cited a paper in RF. I have never submitted to RF. I have never interviewed someone with an RF. None of my colleagues has ever published in that journal. It is not on our target list (we are top 50, but barely), nor it has, frankly, any value towards our tenure process.
   So what am I missing? Is this the longest troll in the history of forums? Or is this journal really valued somewhere? Is this a Europe vs USA thing?

   I am an AP in US and I agree with this summary: no one in our department ~rank 150 has publishes in RF or submits to RF. Like you said it’s not even on the radar. I assume this is a Europe thing. That said, when you look at the journal it has some pubs from famous people but these pubs are not serious research. Look at the recent paper by John. It’s interesting, but it’s just an essay.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 0 Vlad !

8. Economist
   d61a
   

   Agree. MS has the best shot to become the fourth journal. RF---while it is a reasonably good journal---it doesn't look that easy to become a top-3 equivalent.

   RF used to be called European finance review, house journal of European FA. Hence the pro Euro bias. They ditched the euro name to compete for general interest about 15 years ago-ish. AE (LBS) has tried valiantly to make it a top journal and some European schools have decided to count it as top-3 equivalent, effectively trying to push it by creating a temporary arbitrage for some of their juniors. I feel like that backfired though since RF tried to become better by effectivel rejecting every single paper by juniors and soliciting semi dead WPs from seniors.
   It's unbelievably hard to improve a journal at the top and these processes are very sticky. I guess MS has the best claim to being a top since it is considered an A across the entire BSchool, which ultimately made the difference.

   At this point, I feel like this RF thing is a joke I just do not get.
   Bear with me, I am older. I have published in JFE, RFS, JFQA, MS, plus some Bs (JCF, JBF and down that list).
   Yet, RF has never been on my radar, until I came here. I have never submitted there. I have never, ever, cited a paper in RF. I have never submitted to RF. I have never interviewed someone with an RF. None of my colleagues has ever published in that journal. It is not on our target list (we are top 50, but barely), nor it has, frankly, any value towards our tenure process.
   So what am I missing? Is this the longest troll in the history of forums? Or is this journal really valued somewhere? Is this a Europe vs USA thing?

   I am an AP in US and I agree with this summary: no one in our department ~rank 150 has publishes in RF or submits to RF. Like you said it’s not even on the radar. I assume this is a Europe thing. That said, when you look at the journal it has some pubs from famous people but these pubs are not serious research. Look at the recent paper by John. It’s interesting, but it’s just an essay.
   

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

9. Economist
   b1b6
   

   JFQA = MS = RF = A- pub

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

10. Economist
    97f7
    

    吃叉烧包的傻逼们 又开始讨论了

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

11. Economist
    7eac
    

    你这个傻逼又来刷存在感了。

    吃叉烧包的傻逼们 又开始讨论了

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

12. Economist
    97f7
    

    傻逼给你一个set manual 叉烧+烧鹅+车仔面+鱼蛋+通菜 滚

    你这个傻逼又来刷存在感了。

    吃叉烧包的傻逼们 又开始讨论了
    

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

13. Economist
    d798
    

    MS ~ JFQA

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

14. Economist
    b6f6
    

    MS=JFQA=RF

    I've had co-authors push for each one after we got rejected by the top 3. I personally prefer JFQA and RF more because they're faster and equivalent for summer support at my school, but I can see if you're not tenured MS having more appeal.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

15. Economist
    3e0d
    

    RF is #4

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

16. Economist
    f52b
    

    MS is the best for sure

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

Reply

Post <blockquote>Depends on what your senior colleagues think.</blockquote>

Send Post »

Markup: a blockquote code em strong ul ol li.