While we applaud the effort to create real post-publication critique, this solution still operates inside Springer Nature — one of the very publishers driving the problems.
@SpringerNature reported €1.926 billion in revenue and €544 million in adjusted operating profit in FY2025 [1], representing an adjusted operating margin of ~28%. This places it in a broadly comparable profitability range to major technology companies such as Apple (net margin ~27%, operating margin ~high-20s to low-30s) [2] and Alphabet, the parent company of Google and its subsidiaries (operating margin ~30–32%) [3]. They achieve this by getting authors, reviewers, and editors to work largely for free while charging universities and authors exorbitant fees.
Their Research Integrity Group has a track record of selective gatekeeping and, in documented cases, protecting problematic actors rather than correcting the literature.
⚠️ Reforms that keep feeding the same high-margin commercial machine are unlikely to deliver genuine self-correction. Independent platforms and researcher-controlled venues would be far more credible.
📌 Good intention, wrong vehicle.
References
[1] Springer Nature FY2025 Results
group.springernature.com/gp/…
[2] Apple FY2025 Financial Statements
bullfincher.io/companies/app…
[3] Alphabet FY2025 Financial Statements
bullfincher.io/companies/alp…
@elonmusk @WSJ
