I'll second the first commenter.

A NPO just needs to reinvest profits towards whatever its mission is...

I work for a non-profit medical association, and there is every bit as much of a concern about turning a profit on our products, its just where the profits end up that is different.

Heck, we're even getting xmas bonuses. 5% Base salary + $1,000.

Nearly every journal? Taylor & Francis, Springer Verlag. They are for-profit. To name just two that popped to my mind.

Non-profit doesn't mean free. Any money made from journals helps support their core missions.

But their main purpose is no longer "to make money".

I did not say that non-profit means free.

Please note that my comment regarding non-profit status is a response to the claim that the purpose of scientific journals "is to make money". If this claim is true, that their purpose is in fact to make money, then they are fraudulently representing themselves to tax authorities when they claim to be non-profit organizations.

I have no direct knowledge of the cost breakdown for organizations that publish journals, but I could see how the journal could be the money maker for the organization that then allowed them to perform other duties (lobbying, education, etc... ).

My only point is that a print publication could still have the purpose of being a "money maker" and the publisher still be a non-profit.