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: firstname.lastname@example.org
> From: "Griest, Bryan" <BGriest@ci.glendale.ca.us> > Reply-To: "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org> > Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 11:22:23 -0800 > To: "'email@example.com'" <firstname.lastname@example.org> > 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