[SJAAboard] Toward a Library Model for the Loaner Program

[Rob Hawley (SJAA)]

We are under no pressure to change from the current model. The program has used
a distributed storage model since I became a member and it works. It permits a
larger inventory than the library model.  It is stressful only on those that are
managing it.  It does not require a large monthly expense. The current
distributed storage model only requires space for slop. That is far more modest
than if we were storing all of the scopes, but the need can occur without
warning.  



>To Gary

I assume you know the current model is really the >current< model. 

Yes people have offered storage and backed out.  They have also called on short
notice and demanded we take our scope back. Managing that has required luck and
skill on my part.  Lee has provided some valuable temporary storage, but we have
only required a modest amount.

Also recognize that reducing the inventory only reduces the storage footprint.
It does not necessarily increase the loans for any particular type of scope.
Demand varies over time.

Paid storage is not a viable approach for the library model. I only offered that
to contrast the alternatives.  I have also not heard a commitment for enough
storage space to the library model. 

Since Rich and I are the ones that are responsible for making this all work we
are also in a much better position to judge whether the problem is "alleged" or
not.  Remember I feared this program so much that I was unwilling to become
president since I did not want to be responsible for the storage.

>To Mark


The mood on the board (or at least that expressed by two members) has changed in
the past few months.  I proposed in December or January to get rid of all of the
C-8s except the ultima. At that time the board was not willing to consider that
move. I am working on a new proposal that includes further cuts in the inventory
of scopes but these preserve the variety in the program.

The estimate was based on the inventory I presented at the board meeting. The
estimate has some margin of error but it is a large number in any case. The
addition cuts I will propose will reduce the storage further since the SCTs
require a disproportionate amount of storage.

Even having only two scopes in the program does not guarantee they will swap
every three months.  Making that requirement is equivalent to saying you do not
want a loaner program.

GSSP also collects gate money to pay for these "wants".  Operating the loaner
program costs the club nothing. If the club wants to be responsible it should
strive to improve the inventory (something it was unwilling to do before Dec
07).  Comparing these is not an appropriate analogy.





The position of the two of you is clear.  I would like to hear from others on
the board.  Rich and I talked privately, but I do not wish to be his spokesman.
At least Robert agrees with me that the program is an asset. We should be
investing in the program.  

We should consult the membership before we radically change the scope of the
loaner program.  The loaner program is the only service the club provides
exclusively to members. 

Rob Hawley