ACQNET v1n028 (February 19, 1991) URL = http://www.infomotions.com/serials/acqnet/acq-v1n028 ACQNET, Vol 1, No. 28, February 19, 1991 ======================================== (1) FROM: Christian Boissonnas SUBJECT: Who's new on ACQNET (28 lines) (2) FROM: Christian Boissonnas SUBJECT: This issue (9 lines) (3) FROM: Christian Boissonnas SUBJECT: Headers on ACQNET issues (12 lines) (4) FROM: Christian Boissonnas SUBJECT: OP searching in Western Europe (21 lines) (5) FROM: Christian Boissonnas SUBJECT: Ordering from vendor slips (50 lines) (1) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: February 19, 1991 From: Christian Subject: Who's new on ACQNET In the past few days have joined: Ellen Brow Myrna McCallister Basque Studies Librarian Assoc. Libr. for Technical Services University of Nevada, Reno Appalachian State University E-mail: EHB@UNSSUN.NEVADA.EDU E-mail: MCCALLISTERM@APPSTATE.BITNET Lisa German Anna Belle Leiserson Library Operations Asst. for Acquisitions Librarian Acquisitions and Binding Vanderbilt Law Library University of Illinois Library E-mail: LEISERAB@VUCTRVAX.BITNET E-mail: LISAG@UIUCVMD.BITNET Alex Bloss Deputy Executive Director ALCTS E-mail: U47209@UICVM.BITNET (2) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: February 19, 1991 From: Christian Subject: This issue The sharp-eyed among you will already have noticed a certain lack of variety in the bylines of the items in today's issue. That's because nobody has sent me anything recently to post. Besides, there are things I want to say. If it's true that variety is the spice of life, you'd all better keep sending stuff, otherwise you'll be stuck with a Boissonnas diet. (3) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: February 19, 1991 From: Christian Subject: Headers I have found a way to eliminate the headers (all these TO: lines) on outgoing ACQNET issues ... I think. The only way I can think of to test that it works properly is to send this issue twice, once as I have been, with the headers, and once without. At the risk of melting the wires of the Trumansburg Home Telephone Company (no AT&T or NYNEX here), that's what I'll do. Please let me know if you do not receive two copies of this issue, and let me know which one you did not receive (the one with headers or the one without). (4) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: February 19, 1991 From: Christian M. Boissonnas Subject: OP searching in Western Europe This is in reply to Jeffry Larson's query of February 7th. Blackwell's, Casalini, and Harrassowitz keep on file all Cornell orders which they cannot immediately fill. Aux Amateurs de Livres, when it was owned by the Blancheteau family, also did. So did Nijhoff, I think. I can't remember if either of the latter still do. That's something else for me to check upon. I find that many items that I read here make me take a look at what we do. It is not unusual for us to get a query from one of the above companies referring to an order which is eight to ten years old and asking us if we still want it. I don't actually know how actively any of them search for that stuff, rather than keeping them in some sort of gigantic file. I would be surprised if Touzot didn't do it too, although I have never asked them. (5) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: February 19, 1991 From: Christian M. Boissonnas Subject: Ordering from vendor slips I am in a quandary: For a long time I have insisted that the people who select vendors from whom to order in my department follow this rule: If your biblio- graphic information comes from a vendor-supplied slip, you must order from the vendor who sent the slip. If it comes from a catalog, you must order from the vendor who compiled the catalog. The catalog problem is complicated by the fact that some include both antiquarian and current titles. But let's leave it for now. Today I only want to focus on bibliographic slips. My reasoning was that it was unfair, and possibly unethical, to use the information generated by one party for my convenience and order from another, thereby depriving the first party of any advantage that might accrue to him as a result of his helping me. That was fine when only a few vendors generated slips. Now it seems that they all do, and all duplicate each other. We get the same titles on slips from Ballen, Coutts, Yankee, BNA, Blackwell's, Nijhoff, Nedbook, Harrassowitz, Gerits, and so on. It makes no sense to order a Springer title, which is available more cheaply in the U.S., from Blackwell's or Harrassowitz, just because these vendors got their slips to us first. Not only that, it means that I spread a small amount of business in the Netherlands among three vendors. If I only used one I might get better deals and it might be more efficient for me. In addition, because I now have vendors bid for my firm order business, these vendors who still supply us with slips, have no chance of getting orders from them since their bids didn't win. So, what do I do? 1. Tell the vendors who send slips to stop. Our selectors, who like and use the slips, would love that! 2. Tell the vendors: "Send them if you want, but you won't get orders from them." 3. Tell them: "We don't want to buy books from you right now, but we want to buy your slips. How much?" 4. Leave well enough alone. Why do I always have to complicate everything? The vendors know perfectly well how I choose my vendors. If they want to continue sending slips, it's their lookout, not mine. My particular (or peculiar) sense of obligation tells me that the last option is not acceptable, that I must actively do something, and that any one the first three options is acceptable. I expect that my institution, and its selectors, are best served with that fourth option. So, again, what do I do? ***** END OF FILE ***** END OF FILE ***** END OF FILE ***** END OF FILE *****