Date:         Thu, 22 Dec 1994 20:13:36 -0800
Reply-To: markb@cccd.edu
From: Julie Bixby <markb@SPOCK.DIS.CCCD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Duplicate Year End Issues

> Well, its that time of year again!  We are getting many duplicate
> year end issues of journals.  Then next year we will not get all
> issues due us.  Has ANYONE out there solved this problem?  Where
> is the problem, with the publisher?...the agent?....My process
> at the University of Dayton, is to copy both labels and send
> them to our agent (Ebsco) and then wait for the publisher to
> adjust our expire.  I would appreciate any help anyone can give!!!!

Sonya, et al.,

All I can say is "Ditto"!  The only way we've "solved" the problem is to
call the publisher direct IMMEDIATELY that same day the issues arrive--by
the time the claim's gone through the agency, the "duplicate" no longer
exists in their computer.  I've discovered that if you call right away,
it's still in the system, the subscriptions can be merged, and you get
"extended" 1 issue (if monthly) to the proper date.

What's happening is that the fullfillment houses are a) meeting their
monthly quota of "new" subscriptions, b) ignoring the agencies'
instructions that this is a RENEWAL (and they should be looking for the
current subscription, which should be extended, c) ignoring the JANUARY
start date, even if they can't find the existing start date.

Our library has the additional handicap of our name:

     Huntington Beach Public Library

Of course, this--in its entirety--does not fit the mailing label. Thus, we
get all sorts of variations on all 4 words by the people entering the data
to make it fit 1 line. It would help *tremendously* if the publishers/
fullfillment houses had a STANDARDIZED abbreviation for both "public" and
"library", like "pub" and "lib", which would allow the rest to fit, and
make it easier to find in the database.

--
Julie Bixby                        Internet: markb@cccd.edu
Engage Romulan .sig cloaking device....
----------

Date:         Thu, 22 Dec 1994 15:23:00 -0800
From: David_Fisher@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU
Subject:      Re[2]: Duplicate Year End Issues (Carla E. Pantaleon)

          I think everyone who sees this as a problem needs to be
          asking themselves what's the payoff vis a vis the cost
          involved in pursuing the matter. I've seen about 20 renewal
          periods go by during my career and I don't remember
          duplicates ever NOT being a problem. We maintain a backfile
          of duplicates for about a year arranged in alphbetical order
          and sell or trade them the following year.  If we find
          ourselves receiving multiple copies of a title well beyond
          the normal transition period we then inform the vendor so
          steps can be taken to halt the tide.  We are also prepared
          to return unmarked duplicates if asked for. The problem
          scenario seems to work something like this if I'm
          understanding the situation correctly:

          1. Subscription ends but publisher's policy is to provide
          continuing service for several issues into the new year to
          guarantee no breaks in service.

          2. Vendor renews but publisher fails to make the connection
          between renewal and last year's subscription, so continues
          to send several issues under old sub. into the new year to
          avoid any lapses in service between termination of the old
          subscription and start up of the renewal. In the meantime
          customer receives repeated renewal notices from publisher.
          Duplicates begin arriving at years end and continue into the
          new year for several issues past the renewal date.

          This has been going on for sooooo long that I'm convinced
          that publishers see this as less expensive for them than
          hiring the manpower to keep track of and correlate renewals
          to prior year's subscriptions - otherwise I'm sure they
          would have figured out long ago how to eliminate this
          horrendous duplication of materials.

          I imagine these costs are being passed on to the consumer
          but they may be trivial compared to the overall costs of
          subscriptions these days and the resources that would be
          consumed trying to stop it from happening.

          My remedy would be to get each publisher to provide a unique
          identifier for each subscription which would stay with that
          subscription regardless of which agency was handling the
          subscription. When a library changed vendors the
          subscription number would be one of the elements of
          information transferred to the new vendor. As renewals were
          placed for existing subscriptions the agency would forward
          the the subscription id to the publisher along with payment
          and renewals would always be correllated to existing
          subscriptions and the need for duplicate coverage for the
          transition period would be elimintated.  I believe someone
          at Ebsco told me this is already being practiced by some
          publishers but I've seen little evidence of it yet.

          Taking this suggestion one step further, if subscribers
          could quote a unique subscription identifier with each claim
          the entire claims process would be simplified because we
          wouldn't have to provide proof of payment with each claim.
          It would be self evident from the subscription record pulled
          up by the identifier when the publisher went to fulfill the
          claim.

          Comments would be welcome from any publishers lurking on
          this listserv.

          Dave Fisher <dfisher@ucsd.edu>
          Head, Acquisitions
          SIO Library 0175C
          Scripps Institution of Oceanography
          University of California, San Diego
          9500 Gilman Drive
          La Jolla, CA 92093-0175