Once upon a time, publishers printed x amount of copies of a piece, and
if they didnt sell, they stored them forever and ever without any
problem. It is my understanding that, several years ago (I believe my
source mentioned it was during Jimmy Carter's presidency), that the
federal government imposed a tax on inventory that was stored. From
that point on, it didnt make sense for a publisher to hold on to music
that didnt sell, or at least sell a significant quantity of copies.
Publishers either got rid of those inventories, dropped things from
their catalogues, and subsequently have been less and less willing to
take a chance on publishing things that do not indicate they will be a
financial success. Let's hear it for another smart move on the part of
our federal government.
It would make sense to me for publishers to hold on to at least one
archival copy of everything they ever published, so that they could do
a "print on demand" for someone who wanted to perform something out of
print. Although they are not the only ones, I have found Hal Leonard to
be one of the most frustrating publishers. It is virtually impossible
to get a copy of their "instrumental paks" for a number of their pop
and jazz choral arrangements (they still publish and sell the choral
arrangements, but no longer have available the instrumental parts).
Martin
On Aug 22, 2006, at 5:59 PM, keith helgesen wrote:
Thanks David, for some good pointers. I really don't know why
publishers and
copyright holders make life so difficult for us folk who just want to
spend
some money!
Martin Banner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
