unwanted titles. The boycott is gathering momentum, as evidenced by a recent Reed decision finally to cut journal prices after years of nothing but increases. That move was an abrupt reversal of earlier intransigence by Erik Engstrom, the Reed Elsevier CEO who had previously been directly responsible for Elsevier. The risk to the longterm reputation and earnings of Reed's largest business can be gauged by the reaction to its cut in the annual subscription price of Explorations in Economic History from 58 to 31 after editor Dr Tim Leunig's public criticism. Reed seemed to get it all wrong even then, with CEO Engstrom describing the boycott as merely  "a misunderstanding" with its contributors, editors and subscribers. Leunig tore back: "He should be honest and state that, in many cases, his journals have an element of monopoly power." The trouble is that years of above-inflation increases have stained Reed's reputation in academia. In 2010, just as budget cuts were battering academics everywhere, the company increased its prices by an average of 5% ( The Lancet increase was actually 10%) . Worse, Reed boasted to stock analysts that the increase was 2% "better" than had been budgeted. Thick skinned or what? Complacent pricing The heavy-handed corporatism  has motivated formidable figures including Warren Buffet, George Soros, Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales and the influential Wellcome Trust to fund the resistance with "open access" online channels. These have already changed the whole publishing business in some scientific disciplines and seem set to expand further and faster.