Comments on: Unethical Library Vendors: A Call to Arms for Libraries to Fight Back

By: Sarah

Sarah — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 23:32:03 +0000

@Mary C: I can understand that. From the librarian’s perspective, it seems like nine times out of ten a library vendor calling me means they’re trying to sell me something new, make me spend more money…not save money. That’s the bias that we go into that interaction with unfortunately.

By: Mary C

Mary C — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 14:26:46 +0000

I used to work for a library vendor. (I’m not saying which one!). As a vendor/salesperson, I came across at least 100 different librarians that would not give me the time of day. Even when they were already purchasing my product from a distributor; many times at a significant mark-up. Why is that? I know people are busy, but isn’t saving money a good thing?

By: LPT Done

LPT Done — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 00:44:22 +0000

3M and Envisionware are on my bad guy or bad product list.

By: MJ Ray

MJ Ray — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 11:11:36 +0000

Small updates: I have had a reply from OCLC and I think there’s still the same blindness to where vendor money comes from.

By: Lippy Librarian

Lippy Librarian — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:47:19 +0000

Agree with the TLC issues/problems. They promise solutions and don’t deliver.

By: I'm not really a Librarian

I'm not really a Librarian — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 19:55:28 +0000

I worked in Acquisitions for over 15 years at a large research library. When I started, my supervisors directed me to never “put all my eggs in one basket” and distribute orders between vendors. The strategy worked very well–if our discounts or service were substandard, I could (and did) threaten to change vendors. Unfortunately now–electronic resources are often locked into exclusive packages, and management and IT pressure staff into vendor consolidation to make payments and system infrastructure easier. Unfortunately, these consolidations mean worse service for the end user, and service comparisons are irrelevant. If a vendor has exclusive electronic content, they don’t seem very inclined to make small interface changes that would improve the user experience because it has no impact on their bottom line. The same can be true of vendors that “own” major titles that are automatic slam-dunk purchases for libraries (eg. Nature). The other thing that bothers me is that I have heard that serials vendors such as Elsevier want a profit margin of 25%, whereas traditional book publishing has been happy with 5%….if true, that is really evil.

By: Tryin’ to Get My Mojo Workin’ | In the Library with the Lead Pipe

Sun, 25 Jul 2010 16:34:34 +0000

[...] can no longer pay the rising costs of journal subscriptions and are possibly falling victim to unethical library vendors? For example, the University of California is having trouble with the pricing of Nature [...]

By: A lot of Davids make one heck of a Goliath | Information Wants To Be Free

A lot of Davids make one heck of a Goliath | Information Wants To Be Free — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:03:13 +0000

[...] response to my post a few days ago about EBSCO, Sarah Houghton-Jan just wrote an impassioned post about unethical vendor practices, suggesting that we let our vendors know when we are not happy with what they’re doing. While [...]

By: Nate Erb

Nate Erb — Sun, 06 Jun 2010 00:03:52 +0000

I am an IT consultant at a small town library in Wisconsin, and volunteer just as much time there as I bill . The technology waste I seen and cleaned up there is remarkable. There are unfortunately a lot of black sheep in the business, as always caveat emptor.

By: Rachael

Rachael — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:40:56 +0000

Second on the ReferenceUSA fail. Pricing fail, customer service fail, honesty fail.

I will add NewsBank to that list as well.

Ultimately, I get the feeling that vendors think librarians are stupid. I feel patronized and humored whenever I talk to the majority of them.