The paper assesses the draft weighting system used by the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) scheme for measuring the output of refereed economics journal articles. It does so by using data from New Zealand’s economics departments to demonstrate how the rankings of departmental and individual researchers are affected by the use of ERA weights rather than alternative weights employed in the economics literature. It concludes that the draft version of the ERA scheme, as released in August 2008, rewards research quantity over research quality, as traditionally defined.