--- dhbailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I'm not saying the product is superior, just saying
> that MakeMusic
> hasn't done what it needs to do to get its product
> listed! How can a
> prospective buyer, going to JWPepper, even know that
> PrintMusic exists?
I don't know the current situation, but MakeMusic at
least in the past has been in the better situation.
True, you may not have known that PrintMusic existed
if you shopped at JWPepper. But if we shopped
anywhere else in the US, we might not have known
Sibelius existed!
> I know that for a book to become a best-seller it
> has to be sold. I
> know that publishers BUY product placement in
> bookstores. I assume
> Sibelius has done this with jwpepper, to ensure that
> it's product is
> seen first and is seen to be superior to the
> competition.
That's possible. I've never heard of either company
having to do this, but I've never specifically asked.
I've been under the impression that stores make most
of their money off the mark-up, and the popularity of
the product determines the placement in
advertisements.
> My only point in bringing up the product placement
> at jwpepper, a place
> more music educators I know of would go looking for
> music products
> rather than a computer store, has nothing to do with
> quality.
No, it doesn't. My statement wasn't really on topic.
> I know product placement is important for that.
> Jwpepper may have been
> the original distributor of Sibelius in the US, but
> Finale could have
> given it deeper discounts, more spiffs, whatever
> Sibelius offered,
> Finale could have bettered, so that jwpepper may
> have pushed Sibelius
> but it would have pushed Finale MORE.
It may have been like this. But my understanding was
that because JWPepper scored an exclusive deal on
Sibelius, they'd be able to naturally make more money
off of it through sales than through sales of Finale.
There were already more popular music store chains
selling Finale, right? So getting 1/15th (a guess) of
the Finale sales might not be as lucrative as 3/4ths
of the Sibelius sales. It seems like profit from
mark-up alone could account for their interest in
promoting Sibelius more than Finale.
>
> I don't use SmartMusic, however, and I can foresee
> several potential
> outcomes from its growth:
I believe SmartMusic and Finale will begin to promote
each other more and more, increasing the sales of
each. I think the combination of Finale and SmartMusic
makes a very useful educational package. The plan for
the future of Finale that I've heard from management
has always been to continue developing it for all the
current critical audiences. Finale is a profitable
business that's been getting more profitable, despite
the successes of the competition. And I'm quite sure
that management believes as I do that Finale has a
large audience remaining to sell itself to. And they
believe that if they put a greater amount of money
into Finale, they can more than make it up in return.
As such, they will use money generated by SmartMusic
to improve Finale. Both are profitable, and neither
has reached its potential.
I think it could be easy for professionals to look at
the company's SmartMusic efforts and worry that
MakeMusic plans to switch Finale's focus exclusively
to the educational market. All I can say to that is
that I've had the pleasure of working with John
Paulson and the rest of the management, and they've
always seen the publishing industry as a major part of
their future.
If I'm wrong, I'll buy you a copy of Sibelius when
Finale's no longer a contender. :-)
Regards,
Tyler
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
