In response to Birdie's request, here is a brief summary of the meetings I
 attended that might be of interest.

 Faxon's User Breakfast highlighted their projections for price increases for
 foreign and domestic publications (even more tricky with the world situation)
 and their development plans. They THINK foreign titles will go up 15.2 % (as
 compared to 25.6% last year) and U. S. pubs will go up 9.5% (as compared to
 12% last year). They also spoke of their internal Best Practice study, Claims
 audit (which included the discouraging news that 60% of follow-up claims were
 never responded to by publishers since they couldn't distinguish them from 1st
 claims), preliminary plans to provide claimed issues through their Ful-
 fillment Center, and plans to revamp SC-10 into a more sophisticated system to
 be called perhaps SC-21.

 The ALCTS Serials Section Research Libraries Discussion Group had one
 presenter, Ron L. Ray, (Head of Monographic Acquisitions at Rutgers) who spoke
 on evaluating vendors as they prepare to consolidate orders in their several
 campuses. Ray's thesis was that when doing the initial evaluation service
 factors, needs, etc. should be the primary focus, but that the final decision
 should be based on the "bottom line" of lowest cost. There was much follow-up
 discussion from the group relating to how they were dealing with budget cuts
 and what sort of information was necessary from vendors, automated systems,
 etc. to help with the process.

 The SS Research Libraries Discussion Group was meeting at the same time as the
 LITA MARC Holdings IG. I know Gail McMillan was there, so perhaps she can
 report on it. But as announced last summer and frequently during Midwinter,
 there will be a Preconference in Atlanta on the Holdings Format. Also the MARC
 Holdings IG and the ALCTS/LITA Retrospective Conversion Discussion Group will
 be co-sponsoring a program on the Holdings Format this summer.

 The LITA Serials Automation Interest Group had an interesting session on
 running dual systems. Several speakers and follow-up discussion presented the
 pros and cons. Although most did not initially choose such a set-up, many
 would continue it as they might be getting more sophisticated functioning and
 data from their Acquisitions/Serials systems (Innovaq being mentioned
 frequently) than they could from their primary Circulation/OPAC, etc. system.
 The presenters at this session were Anne Myers, Head of Technical Services,
 Pappas Law Library, Boston University, Marilyn Lutz,Systems Librarian, Fogler
 Library, University of Maine, and Josie Williamson, Coordinator of Serials
 Acquisitions, Universityof Delaware Library. Myers had been at Maine, which
 theoretically at least had one system, before coming to BU & the Law Library
 which is a multi-system environment. Although she mentioned both advantages
 and disadvantages of such a set-up, the frustrations of duplicate effort,
 locating information, etc. seemed dominant. I think the multiple systems are
 largely a product of the various libraries' autonomy. Lutz described the
 situation at Maine which is technically at least, a single system with
 multiple library users. Williamson advocated running dual systems when the
 serials system was better for serials work and also was cognizant of the
 efforts which had gone to record set-up in that system. At this group there
 was even more discussion relating to the necessity of sophisticated and accu-
 rate financial data for collection management applications in this age of
 budget cuts. Several libraries indicated they would continue to run dual
 systems since they could get better data from their acquisitions/serials
 system. Most seemed to agree that the ideal was still the fully integrated
 system.

 Hope this is of some interest to the group.

 Linda Visk
 Head, Serials Control Dept.,
 General Libraries, Emory University, Atlanta GA 30322
 (404) 727-0121  Bitnet: LIBRLV@EMUVM1