Librarians frequently utilize product trials to assess the content and usability of a database prior to committing funds to a new subscription or purchase. At the 2012 Electronic Resources and Libraries Conference in Austin, Texas, three librarians presented a panel discussion on their institutions' policies and practices regarding database trials. These librarians, Annis Lee Adams of Golden Gate University, Jon Ritterbush of the University of Nebraska-Kearney, and Christine E. Ryan of Clemson University, shared suggested practices for database trials. During the question-and-answer session, panelists were asked why they limit their database trials to librarians and/or faculty instead of advertising to a broader audience. Ritterbush answered while it does constrain the pool of responses, doing so reduces potential confusion or false hopes among library users, should the trial database not be acquired. Another attendee asked how librarians can know whether funding for a database will be available, if they are trialing three or more databases at a time. Ryan stated libraries should develop a prioritized wish list and use this list to manage the expectations of trial requestors, trial evaluators, and vendors. Sharing these priorities and funding constraints can also mobilize other campus constituencies to petition for additional library support.