The Journal’s visibility and impact remain extremely high. The articles published in the Journal in 2006 and 2007 were cited 14,679 times during 2008, a total that ranks first among business and finance journals and third among all economics journals (behind the American Economic Review and Econometrica). Our impact factor (cites during 2008 to articles published in 2006 and 2007, divided by the total number of articles published in those two years) is 4.018, which ranks first among business and finance journals and third among all economics journals (behind the Quarterly Journal of Economics and the Journal of Economic Literature).

Turnaround time remains good, with almost 70% of the editorial decisions taking less than 70 days and only 18% taking over 100 days. Table IV provides details on turnaround for the editorial decisions made during 2009. Figure 1 compares turnaround for 2007, 2008, and 2009. The median turnaround time appears to increase from 39 days to 45 days. However, as mentioned earlier, 2009 is the first year where style rounds have been purged from the reporting process. Given that these style rounds often have very quick turnaround, 45 days is more representative of the median turnaround in 2008 and 2007. Let me comment on the 18% of papers that take more than 100 days. First, most of these papers are in the 100- to 120-day range. For example, as of December 31, 2009, there was no paper currently in process more than 184 days. Second, many of these “late” papers are revise and resubmits. For these papers, the Associate Editor will provide extra comments based on an independent reading of the paper and the referee’s report. In addition, I will provide my own report on every revise and resubmit, and the co-editor might also provide a report. These extra reports add to the turnaround time of a revise and resubmit. However, this is deliberate. My strategy is to get maximum feedback in the first submission so that the second submission is very close to publication quality. Table V provides information on the Journal’s acceptance and rejection rates. The number of acceptances increased in 2009 compared to 2008. The backlog of unpublished accepted articles is less than a year, meaning there is a fairly short time from acceptance to publication. The average length of the review process, together with the publication backlog, results in a significant period during which the editor who handled an article is not necessarily the one whose name appears on the masthead when the article is published. Of the articles published in 2009, about 32% (25 papers) were handled by Rob Stambaugh.

As has been said before, the Journal reflects the collaborative efforts of a great many people. My Co-Editor, John Graham, and the Associate Editors do a wonderful job in filling the role I have asked of them. Last year the Journal relied on over 700 referees who, with few exceptions, made time in their busy schedules to provide the type of diligent and prompt feedback that continues to play a vital role in the Journal’s success. (Appendix A lists the individuals who refereed for the Journal during 2009.) Clearly, you, the members of the Association, value the Journal highly, and it has been a great honor and privilege for me to have been entrusted with its care.

We continue to work with BEPress in making refinements to the system, and I believe the electronic system has proven to serve our needs rather well. One of the most important reasons for a smooth functioning of our journal is our editorial assistant, Wendy Washburn, who is a huge asset to the Journal. Not only is Wendy vital in keeping the many day-to-day activities of the editorial office running smoothly, as many of you have probably experienced as authors and reviewers, but she very ably supervises the copyediting and the pre-publication interface with Blackwell. Wendy has served the Journal for seven years. Beginning in 2010, she takes on the new title of Assistant Editor.

Other important highlights are as follows. First, over the past year I worked closely with the Editorial Advisory Committee (EAC) of the American Finance Association. The EAC meets about four times per year. Second, in the November 2009 EAC meeting, the EAC decided to adopt a more formal policy on appeals. The policy has the following components: (i) authors are allowed one appeal every four years; (ii) the policy of one appeal every four years applies to all coauthors; (iii) all coauthors must email the Assistant Editor, Wendy Washburn, with their intention to appeal; (iv) the Editor's decision on appeals is final; and (v) authors not satisfied with the process can email the chairperson of the EAC. This Committee will not overrule the Editor. Third, we continue to build the Internet Appendix (IA) section that is associated with published papers. The IA allows the main section of a paper to be leaner while also allowing interested readers to delve deeper into the published research. Furthermore, the IA allows for the repurposing of work conducted as part of the refereeing process that does not make it into the main text of the paper. Fourth, we have made considerable progress in reducing the number of rounds before acceptance. In 2009, 73% of accepted papers were accepted on the second revision. This compares to only 48% in 2008.

Each year the Journal awards a number of prizes for articles that it has published. The eligible papers for the 2009 prizes were all those published in the six issues of the Journal from December 2008 through October 2009. The Smith Breeden prizes, which recognize articles in all areas except corporate finance, consist of one first prize of $10,000 and two distinguished-paper prizes of $5000 each. The Brattle Group prizes, which recognize articles in corporate finance, consist of one first prize of $10,000 and two distinguished-paper prizes of $5000. The Associate Editors nominated the papers. We then formed a list of finalists and the Associate Editors voted for the prize winners. Assistant Editor Wendy Washburn handled the balloting. This year there were seven finalists for the Smith Breeden prizes and eight finalists for the Brattle Group prizes. Appendices B and C list the winning papers as well as the finalists. On behalf of the Journal, I have congratulated all of the authors of the nominated papers. The prizes were announced at the AFA Business Meeting in Atlanta.