Re: Waste of our subscription dollars (4 messages) Ann Ercelawn 08 Jun 1995 18:14 UTC

4 messages:

Date: Wed, 07 Jun 1995 16:19:17 -0400
Subject: RE: Waste of our subscription dollars (2 messages)

RE: Publisher junk mail

This one is TOO tempting to pass up. Masses of duplicate flyers,
catalogs, announcements, etc. from publishers is definitely one of my
pet peeves. As others have already stated, if we are being asked to
down size, reorganize, streamline and be more efficient, then why
can't they do so as well by cleaning up their mailing lists?

Related to this, is the phone call asking if we have received their
sample issue. Yes, we received yours and hundreds of others. Will we
use it to possibly place an order? Yes, maybe, if we ever order
journals again!

Publishers should spend more time listening to their market, if
indeed, they consider libraries as their market (some do not
consider libraries their primary market, of course).

That felt good --thanks for bringing it up!
Hope someone who matters is out there listening ...

Eleanor Cook
Belk Library
Appalachian State University
Boone, NC 28608

Date: Thu, 08 Jun 1995 09:06:20 -0500
From: Jeanette Skwor <SKWORJ@GBMS01.UWGB.EDU>
Subject: RE: Waste of our subscription dollars (2 messages)

I'm glad to see this topic addressed and would add my Amen Amen Amen.  We
too go through them (because a certain--albeit teeny tiny--percentage of
them are indeed viable renewal notices; we then forward them to then
vendor.  Like the consensus-- a LOT of time and $$$ wasted, including our
postage forwarding these.

I like Sonya's act of sending a bundle of them to the publisher; maybe if
we'd all do that, they'd get the message!  Better yet, return them
individually with their postage-prepaid cards and let them pay for their
own returns.  (Although of course we pay for it ultimately).

Anyway, Bravo for bringing the topic up, and I for one hope to hear others
thoughts and solutions.  Publishers?  Vendors?

Jeanette Skwor
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay

Date: Wed, 07 Jun 1995 16:13:46 -0400
From: Mario Rups <MRUPS@BROOK.EDU>
Subject: RE: Waste of our subscription dollars (2 messages)

On the other hand, I've heard that it would take more money in manhours to
check these things for each individual subscriber than to absorb the cost
into the advertising budget.  I'd say, time to revamp the DBMS, then, if
it's this badly planned, but that might cost more, too.

Might be wrong.  Just saying what I've heard.

Either way, I'd say the trees are the biggest losers.

Mario Rups (recycling the third copy of the same advert as bookmark in
     latest Choice; perhaps I'll make a paper airplane out of the fourth)

Date: Thu, 8 Jun 1995 13:32:24 GMT-5
Subject: RE: SERIALST Digest - 6 Jun 1995 to 7 Jun 1995

    I am SO glad that we're not the only ones who suffered under
the incredible mass mailing W&W sent out.

    But so far, Quillen Medical Library beats everyone in totals
of letters received... 54 of them. Seems to me that Williams &
Wilkins must've changed something... either merged their mailing
list or changed accounting firms to cause this sort of massive
foul up.

Kimberly J. Laird
Technical Services Librarian//Quillen College of Medicine
East Tennessee State University