Music Trade Review -- © mbsi.org, arcade-museum.com -- digitized with support from namm.org
SPECIAL-WHO'S WHO IN THE PIANO INDUSTRY.
VOL.
L I X N o . 25
REWfflf
Published Every Saturday by Edward Lyman Bill at 373 Fourth Ave., New York, Dec. 19, 1914
$2.00 PER YEAR.
The Throw-Ins Render Price Stability Impossible.
T
^ i E war is serving as a convenient peg upon which to hang all kinds of reasons for slaughter
selling of almost every kind of merchandise.
Study the advertisements throughout the land, and it is surprising how many times the
European war is credited with causing a cut rate in merchandise—merchandise which has not
the remotest relation to the war—and, yet, a most remarkable influence is ascribed to the conditions
created by it.
Even some Ohio merchants come out with illustrations of siege guns, etc., destroying piano
prices, and some of them are throwing in extra war inducements in the way of still larger baits,
such as music rolls, benches, scarfs, et al.
I am very glad indeed to notice that my arguments against the throw-in policy adopted by
many piano merchants are arousing considerable interest, if I may judge from correspondence
which has reached this office.
To my mind, there is no better illustration of how an unwise legacy may be perpetuated to
trade disadvantage than is evidenced in this throw-in policy.
Years ago, when clothing merchants were giving away suspenders, neckties, collar buttons, etc.,
with suits, the early piano merchants fell into the same habit of giving away stools and scarfs; they
were the equivalent of the suspenders and ties of the clothing merchants. This plan has been fol-
lowed out to the disadvantage of the trade ever since, and while merchants in the general line have
cut it out entirely, so that when a customer buys a suit of clothes he pays for it individually, and
not bunched in with a lot of accessory fittings.
The piano merchant has still clung to the old, musty traditions of the past. He is still giving
valuable merchandise which should pay him handsome profits, and is fondly hugging the delusion
that by so doing he is making a good business deal by which he is enriched.
Even the department stores, whose managers are graduates from the regular piano school, fol-
low this same plan in their advertisements, and it is rather amusing to note that it is the only
department in their entire business wherein the throw-in policy is carried out.
Can there be any better illustration of an old, moss-grown policy stagnating modern trade than
is evidenced in this?
What are piano men selling, when they throw in extra inducements, music rolls or pianos,
benches or pianos, music lessons or pianos?
I affirm that the throw-in policy has cheapened the entire business, made one price impossible,
and has materially reduced the profits of the entire retail trade.
The throw-in plan is strongly opposed to the one-price policy, because it means nothing more
or less than a yielding price.
If anyone can show me how this ancient legacy is working out to the financial advantage of
modern piano merchants, I should be indeed pleased to have the scales removed from my eyes.
The war is being used as an excuse for doing, or not doing, many things that are really inex-
cusable, but I cannot see how any excuse can be made for throwing in a lot of price-baiting mate-
rial w r hich should pay a handsome profit and which people are bound to purchase later, after hav-
ing made the principal purchase of a piano.
(Continued on page 5.)
.