@article{
 title = {Flat or float? a study of vendor discount rates applied to firm orders in a college library},
 type = {article},
 year = {1998},
 identifiers = {[object Object]},
 pages = {409-414},
 volume = {22},
 websites = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036464089800091X},
 id = {dcffcc09-25ca-352b-8c5f-bff5d429b68a},
 created = {2017-04-24T17:37:00.459Z},
 accessed = {2017-04-24},
 file_attached = {false},
 profile_id = {06b627cf-c50c-3a38-83cf-d4ec6aa67244},
 group_id = {46302765-27c6-3c57-9618-e15b2c93e0ea},
 last_modified = {2017-04-24T17:37:00.653Z},
 read = {false},
 starred = {false},
 authored = {false},
 confirmed = {false},
 hidden = {false},
 private_publication = {false},
 abstract = {Library book vendors generally provide two types of discount rates to institutions for firm orders: flat—fixed rate for all books, and float—book-by-book discount. A perplexing question for acquisitions departments is which discount scale is better. This article summarizes a study conducted in a medium-sized, public, college library for the purpose of ascertaining if there is a difference in savings between the two schedules. The results indicate that, at Kean College, float rate (0%–33.3%) gains slightly more savings (0.7% of $35,795.84) than flat rate (12%) based on 870 book orders distributed between university presses (38.4%) and nonuniversity presses (61.6%). However, if the flat rate is 13% or higher, for the same distribution, the flat discount is considered monetarily more advantageous. These findings suggest options and flexibility for acquisitions personnel in obtaining the most cost-effective arrangement for the institution.},
 bibtype = {article},
 author = {Kuo, Hui-Min},
 journal = {Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory},
 number = {4}
}

{"_id":"yANSM7fdtL7aEjTcq","bibbaseid":"kuo-flatorfloatastudyofvendordiscountratesappliedtofirmordersinacollegelibrary-1998","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2018-01-23T11:27:44.424Z","title":"Flat or float? a study of vendor discount rates applied to firm orders in a college library","author_short":["Kuo, H."],"year":1998,"bibtype":"article","biburl":null,"bibdata":{"title":"Flat or float? a study of vendor discount rates applied to firm orders in a college library","type":"article","year":"1998","identifiers":"[object Object]","pages":"409-414","volume":"22","websites":"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036464089800091X","id":"dcffcc09-25ca-352b-8c5f-bff5d429b68a","created":"2017-04-24T17:37:00.459Z","accessed":"2017-04-24","file_attached":false,"profile_id":"06b627cf-c50c-3a38-83cf-d4ec6aa67244","group_id":"46302765-27c6-3c57-9618-e15b2c93e0ea","last_modified":"2017-04-24T17:37:00.653Z","read":false,"starred":false,"authored":false,"confirmed":false,"hidden":false,"private_publication":false,"abstract":"Library book vendors generally provide two types of discount rates to institutions for firm orders: flat—fixed rate for all books, and float—book-by-book discount. A perplexing question for acquisitions departments is which discount scale is better. This article summarizes a study conducted in a medium-sized, public, college library for the purpose of ascertaining if there is a difference in savings between the two schedules. The results indicate that, at Kean College, float rate (0%–33.3%) gains slightly more savings (0.7% of $35,795.84) than flat rate (12%) based on 870 book orders distributed between university presses (38.4%) and nonuniversity presses (61.6%). However, if the flat rate is 13% or higher, for the same distribution, the flat discount is considered monetarily more advantageous. These findings suggest options and flexibility for acquisitions personnel in obtaining the most cost-effective arrangement for the institution.","bibtype":"article","author":"Kuo, Hui-Min","journal":"Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory","number":"4","bibtex":"@article{\n title = {Flat or float? a study of vendor discount rates applied to firm orders in a college library},\n type = {article},\n year = {1998},\n identifiers = {[object Object]},\n pages = {409-414},\n volume = {22},\n websites = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036464089800091X},\n id = {dcffcc09-25ca-352b-8c5f-bff5d429b68a},\n created = {2017-04-24T17:37:00.459Z},\n accessed = {2017-04-24},\n file_attached = {false},\n profile_id = {06b627cf-c50c-3a38-83cf-d4ec6aa67244},\n group_id = {46302765-27c6-3c57-9618-e15b2c93e0ea},\n last_modified = {2017-04-24T17:37:00.653Z},\n read = {false},\n starred = {false},\n authored = {false},\n confirmed = {false},\n hidden = {false},\n private_publication = {false},\n abstract = {Library book vendors generally provide two types of discount rates to institutions for firm orders: flat—fixed rate for all books, and float—book-by-book discount. A perplexing question for acquisitions departments is which discount scale is better. This article summarizes a study conducted in a medium-sized, public, college library for the purpose of ascertaining if there is a difference in savings between the two schedules. The results indicate that, at Kean College, float rate (0%–33.3%) gains slightly more savings (0.7% of $35,795.84) than flat rate (12%) based on 870 book orders distributed between university presses (38.4%) and nonuniversity presses (61.6%). However, if the flat rate is 13% or higher, for the same distribution, the flat discount is considered monetarily more advantageous. These findings suggest options and flexibility for acquisitions personnel in obtaining the most cost-effective arrangement for the institution.},\n bibtype = {article},\n author = {Kuo, Hui-Min},\n journal = {Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory},\n number = {4}\n}","author_short":["Kuo, H."],"urls":{"Website":"http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036464089800091X"},"bibbaseid":"kuo-flatorfloatastudyofvendordiscountratesappliedtofirmordersinacollegelibrary-1998","role":"author","downloads":0},"search_terms":["flat","float","study","vendor","discount","rates","applied","firm","orders","college","library","kuo"],"keywords":[],"authorIDs":[]}