Re: [Videolib] borrowing fees for videos

deg farrelly (deg.farrelly@asu.edu)
Tue, 09 Nov 2004 13:37:54 -0700

Afraid I disagree with this philosophy.

Why should videos have to be self-sustaining fiscally or be discontinued?
Why not periodicals, or novels? Or self-help books.

Isn't the cost per loan of a video significantly lower than the cost per
loan of a novel?

--
deg farrelly, Associate Librarian
Arizona State University West Library
PO Box 37100 
Phoenix, Arizona  85069-7100
Phone:  602.543.8522
Email:  deg.farrelly@asu.edu

> From: "Griest, Bryan" <BGriest@ci.glendale.ca.us> > Reply-To: "videolib@library.berkeley.edu" <videolib@library.berkeley.edu> > Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 11:22:23 -0800 > To: "'videolib@library.berkeley.edu'" <videolib@library.berkeley.edu> > Subject: RE: [Videolib] borrowing fees for videos > > 2 things: 1) Tax revenues are plummeting; you may be paying for something, > but it may not be the cost of the materials. You may be paying for the > building, or the salaries, etc. This is an obvious statement, but I've > worked in a couple of libraries that had $0 for materials in some > years--$0!--even though taxes were still being collected. 2) If we didn't > charge for video rentals (which are admittedly the only materials we could > "get away with" charging for), we wouldn't have had money to buy anything at > all. At least from my experience, the video collections had to become > self-sustaining fiscally or be discontinued completely. Given that choice, I > think even the irritated middle class would vote for a continued collection. > Bryan > Glendale Public Library

_______________________________________________ Videolib mailing list Videolib@library.berkeley.edu http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/videolib