Skip to content
Innovative Idea Exchange

Settings and activity

2 results found

  1. 7 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Shari Sievers supported this idea  · 
  2. 10 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Shari Sievers supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Shari Sievers commented  · 

    Since the death of Baker & Taylor, all smaller vendors that are willing to do EDI ordering/invoicing are now quite attractive. Ingram and other EDI enabled suppliers who took on the bulk of B&T's business are struggling to provide the same services to all their customers that they did before. Libraries are all feeling this pain and need more EDI vendors to choose from to make sure we can still provide materials on a timely basis. Libraries cannot afford to hire more acquisitions and more materials processing staff to deal with the big suppliers' lack of services. Other choices prevent a monopoly by the big vendors that will severely hurt libraries. We are already forced to use Amazon to buy many materials and they refuse to provide any services for libraries. With no choices of vendors that specifically market themselves towards libraries, it is foreseeable that big vendors will follow the example of Amazon and aim for larger control of the market, with fewer and fewer services provided. This will greatly impact the budgets of all libraries and thus impact Innovative and others in the industry who market services to libraries.