This is my opinion only guys. I can happily do my projects in F2008 and you can also. Yes, there are some additions that would be nice but the fact is we are dealing with a system, music notation, that was created many years ago and hasn't changed significantly. Finale, Sibelius and now Steinberg give most of us the tools we need. And the fact is that notation is becoming less important with younger pop musicians. So the market is shrinking. As already stated companies have to make the stock holder happy. I remember Dick Grove once said to "your success as a composer or arranger/producer is not being made by someone that understands creativity or even like music, it is being made by a bean counter." I sincerely feel we are at the start gloomy period for Finale. I also hope I'm wrong. Musically, Terry
On Wednesday, November 20, 2013 5:46 PM, Craig Parmerlee <[email protected]> wrote: On 11/20/2013 4:36 PM, David H. Bailey wrote: > My first thought when reading about the reorganization at MakeMusic is > that the new owners, being venture capitalists and not software > developers, are looking to reshape the Finale team so they can make it > more marketable to another company such as Cakewalk. Steinberg is > developing their own notation program, Avid has Sibelius to go along > with ProTools, Presonus bought up Notion, so the only independent > notation program is Finale. Thinking like a venture capitalist, that's > what I would do -- invest in modernizing the code so that it could > more easily be incorporated into another product line, get a new > upgrade out the door to recoup some of the investment as well as prove > to potential corporate buyers that there's a thriving marketplace > still, then unload just Finale or possibly the whole company or > spinoff SmartMusic on its own and sell that also to some educational > software company. It is an interesting thought. This is definitely the normal "KKR" mode of operation used over and over by turnaround specialists. The situation may be slightly different in this instance because the present ownership has a longer term involvement with Coda/MakeMusic. They didn't race in a buy the company for a quick flip. Instead they bought it to protect a sizable investment they already had made. Nonetheless, I think you make a solid point that ownership's goal is surely to prepare the company to be attractive as an exit plan. I don't know that the reorganization foreshadows breaking the company into component pieces to sell off individually. But it isn't bad to keep that option open. The universe of buyers is not particularly large, as there has already been a lot of consolidation in the music technology business. Avid bought Sibelius, which made a little sense. But then they proceeded to gut that development team. Avid hasn't made a profit for over 5 years. because of that experience, others are probably not eager to jump into the notation space. Steinberg is backed by Yamaha, and having an advanced notation product makes perfect sense for Yamaha, given their marketing reach throughout the entire music business. But they have already placed their bets with Daniel Spreadbury. I believe that Cakewalk is the most likely target. They were acquired by Roland a few years back, and that almost killed Cakewalk/Sonar. Things just moved too slowly under Roland. Roland is selling Cakewalk to Gibson, which is one of the real Goliaths in the music business. Most of Gibson's properties are on the performing side, but the acquisition of Cakewalk indicates an interest in growing into the software side of the music technology business. They have the muscle to support this long-term. Beyond that, I just don't see very many good fits. Maybe one of the big music publishing houses would be interested in owning the notation product that most of the new scores are written with. But that's a long shot, I'd think. I guess there is the Steinway/Conn/Selmer/UMI thing. But they really are into physical instruments and not anything electronic. There are second tier companies like Vienna Instruments, which is a competitor of Garritan, and perceived as more of an upscale product. They might have an interest, but that seems like a big bite for them to swallow. Considering all of the above, if Gibson isn't interested, then I don't see a good acquisition play. That leaves the ownership with the need to make the company attractive enough to take it public again. _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
