[WEB4LIB] Re: library marketing was RE: Google Mail invitations?

[Ross Singer]

I have to agree with Amos, here (for the umpteenth time).  As even
academic libraries struggle with irrelevance to their core
constituency, I would say it's important, dare I say even
critical, to figure out how to be "trendy".

Even more important than "trendy" (because it would be like
"trendy with longevity") would be "ubiquity".  If only we could
achieve the market share of a Starbucks (anyone?) or a Google,
there wouldn't be the need to slash monograph budgets to pay for
increasing serials bills.

If libraries want to survive, it is going to have to be by at
least paying attention to free-market success stories.  We must
have public interfaces that are as easy to use as Amazon or
Google.  We must make it easier to get the material that the user
wants over Amazon's marketplace.  As long as my local public
library takes 5 weeks /to deliver a book from another branch/, I
will opt for buying the damn thing used off of Amazon for $3.50. 
I would love to say that this is just isolated to one inefficient
library system, but I see it again and again.

Why is it that sites with ISBNs have links to Amazon or Barnes and
Noble and Powell's, but never to your public library?  Certainly
there are a kickbacks, but not in every case.

"There's no question that we provide what people want. Barnes and
Noble,
the NY Times, Netflix, and ISPs charge for the same stuff that
libraries
GIVE AWAY in the form of books, movies, periodicals, and computer
access."

This very quote negates itself because these /very successful
enterprises/ can /charge/ what for what we /give away/.

We don't give many people what they want, at all, and we better
figure out something soon, because someday somebody who charges
for what we do (Questia, Elsevier, Google?) might take away those
remaining "customers", as well.

-Ross.

On Mon, February 14, 2005 7:24 pm, Amos Lakos said:
> Mr. Collier - I wonder?
>
> how do you know that libraries are delivering what the customers
> want?
> do you have some data or assessment to rely on?
>
> and what is wrong with being popular or trendy - what is wrong
> with
> Starbucks?
>
> Why should library services not strive for online success such as
> Google's?
> Who says we can't compete with this or that, just because we are
> not
> private?
>
> Come on - be positive........
>
> Mr. Amos
>
> --On Monday, February 14, 2005 3:41 PM -0800 "Mr. Brian Collier"
> <collierb at marist.com> wrote:
>
>> This is veering off topic, but I have to disagree with Roy's
>> evaluation
>> of A and B.
>>
>> There's no question that we provide what people want. Barnes and
>> Noble,
>> the NY Times, Netflix, and ISPs charge for the same stuff that
>> libraries
>> GIVE AWAY in the form of books, movies, periodicals, and
>> computer
>> access. As far as ease of access, all people have to do is walk,
>> run,
>> bike, or drive to their community library. I suppose we could
>> make it
>> easier for some people to get that information if we streamed it
>> digitally, but given the relatively low percentage of the
>> population
>> that has a computer and broadband connection, we'd be missing
>> too many
>> consumers.
>>
>> The crux of the question was how can we make library services
>> "trendy",
>> and that's the problem. I for one don't want my library to be
>> trendy.
>> (Starbucks anyone?)
>>
>> Maybe library services don't get the online popularity that
>> Google
>> enjoys, and while this list is all about Web library services,
>> that's
>> not our home turf. We (largely publicly funded entities) can't
>> compete
>> with Google (a private corporation) that way, nor should we. We
>> are not
>> an online mogul, we serve the public face-to-face in a
>> distributed
>> network. Take a gate count. How many people came into your
>> library this
>> week? Multiply that by the number of public libraries in your
>> state, or
>> better yet by the number of libraries in the U.S. or across the
>> globe.
>>
>> To bring things somewhat back within the scope of this list; we
>> can and
>> should use online tools to provide another layer of service to
>> the
>> community, which is why we're getting these messages in our
>> inboxes, but
>> if we lose sight of the fact that we are not an online service,
>> then we
>> may as well shut the doors and let Google take over.
>>
>> Brian Collier
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: web4lib at webjunction.org
>> [mailto:web4lib at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Roy Tennant
>> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 5:31 PM
>> To: Multiple recipients of list
>> Subject: [WEB4LIB] Re: library marketing was RE: Google Mail
>> invitations? Any takers?
>>
>> On Feb 14, 2005, at 2:23 PM, Margaret Henderson wrote:
>>
>>> How can we make library
>>> services as trendy as Gogle mail?
>>
>> A) Provide something people really want, and B) make it easy to
>> get.
>>
>> In general, we do so-so on A and suck at B. Next question?
>> Roy
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Amos Lakos
> Librarian, Rosenfeld Management Library
> UCLA - Anderson School of Management
> 110 Westwood Plaza, Box 951460
> Los Angeles, CA 90095-1460
> Phone: (310) 794-4381
> Fax: (310) 825-4835
> E-mail: aalakos at library.ucla.edu
> Web: http://personal.anderson.ucla.edu/amos.lakos/index.html
>
>
>



----------------------------------------------------------------------
        This email was composed using the GTEL Webmail client.

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity
to  which  it  is  addressed  and  may  contain  confidential  and/or
priviledged  material. Any  review, retransmission,  dissemination or
other  use  of, or  taking  of any  action  in  reliance  upon, this
information  by persons or entities other than the intended recipient
is prohibited.

           Georgia Tech Library and Information Center
                  http://www.library.gatech.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------