Mark Seeley wrote:

>The standard repertory that was once a safe haven is now the target.
>In the core repertory, few, if any, of today's conductors are able to
>create the kind of excitement that made their predecessor's recordings
>hot commodities.  The market seemingly isn't able to sustain the newest
>interpretations of the "warhorses."

I don't think it's a matter of "newest" interpretation as much as "highest
priced" interpretation.  The market is saturated as a result of record
companies issuing new budget recordings and reissues from the past.  Full
price recordings must compete with issues that cost a great deal less.
There has to be a strong incentive for a consumer to pay such a substantial
difference in price.  We are now in a phase where the consumer is not
willing to pay the difference.  So, the record companies do what they have
to do - cut down on full-price releases.  At some point in the future,
although it could well take 10 or more years, the last phase of this cycle
will emerge.  What might it be? An intensification of what is happening now
followed by equilibrium.

There will be an increase of excellent new bargain recordings, an increase
of reissues as most current full priced recordings end up as mid priced,
and a relatively huge increase of mid priced new recordings from the
"majors" of newer artists.  With this increased competition, new
full-priced recordings will be pared down to just the "bankable" artists,
period.

My point here is that the market is currently in a "correction" mode in
this matter.  It was not good economic sense to sell us non-bankable
aritsts at full price; the policy was not natural, but the public's
monetary response certainly was.  So, I see a natural conclusion where
newer artists are sold at mid price, the bankable ones at full price,
and all parties to this free market movement are at rest.  Good night
one and all.

Ever The Optimist,
Don Satz