Music Trade Review -- © mbsi.org, arcade-museum.com -- digitized with support from namm.org
The (jnusic j/iade
REVIEW
Established 1879
CARLETON CHACE, Editor
Alex H. Kolbe, Publisher
A. C. Osborne
Associate Editor
V. T. Costello
Production Manager
NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION
OF MUSIC
MERCHANTS
Alexander Hart
Technical Editor
Dorothy Elizabeth Bloom
Circulation Manager
Published monthly at 510 RKO Building, Radio
City, 1270 Sixth Avenue. New York 20, N. Y.
Telephone: Circle 7-5842-5843-5844
Vol. 1 1 2
AUGUST, 1953
No. 8
Business-As We See It
T
HERE will probably be some people who will
not like this Editorial, but we have read so
many comments pro and con regarding the re-
cent Convention which was held at the Palmer House
in Chicago that we feel that we should at least com-
ment on some of them. Accord-
ing to the reports which come
from piano manufacturers, the
majority of them say that the
Convention was a flop piano-wise.
In other words, the feeling is that
considering the expense entailed
in putting on exhibits at the Con-
vention the return in orders was
not satisfactory. Last year we had
a lot of criticism 'about having the
CARLETON CHACE
Convention in New York. The
questionnaire which was sent out
by the N.A.M.M. regarding the place to hold the
Convention distinctly showed that Chicago should
be the best city. Now, we find from the criticism this
year that, after all, Chicago is not any better than
New York. So, what's the answer? It is certainly
interesting to do a little anlalyzing of the attendance
to this 1953 Convention. At the annual banquet it
10
was announced with considerable glee that there were
8,448 registrations, but in more sober moments in
analyzing this attendance we can deduct at least 1500
persons who were there conducting exhibits at the
Show, which should leave 6948. Now we will assume
that each dealer or other person who attended the
Convention had at least 2 other persons with them.
So, this would leave 2,316 dealers who possibly might
place an order. This, however, does not mean that
the 2,316 would place orders for pianos. Many of
them might place orders for organs, chimes, musical
merchandise, television, radios, phonographs, rec-
ords, recorders, supplies, accessories, etc. So, from
this analysis and from what we have heard from the
traveling men who attended the Convention, we may
assume that the piano dealer attendance was nearer
300 than any figure or about 1 0 % of the dealers
who sell pianos throughout the country. Perhaps,
however, it might have been less, and could possibly
have been 1 0 % of the 2,316. This is the situation
which brought about the question from one of the
executives of one of the large piano manufacturers
—"Why Don't More Piano Dealers Attend the Con-
vention?"
Some Personal Experiences
Recorded
I
N analyzing the callers at one of the piano ex-
hibits, it was found that 6 5 % of those who visited
this exhibit came from Ohio, Illinois and Indiana.
This was an exhibit which created considerable at-
tention, too. This, therefore, would show that most
of the attendance was from nearby states. Another
evidence of this was the fact that the sales manager
of a well-known organization who has approximately
20 well-known houses in the eastern section of the
country handling his products, was visited by two of
his customers. A similar situation again arose from
dealers on the Pacific coast, a small number of whom
attended the Convention, even with it being in Chi-
cago. More than one of the large piano manufac-
turers felt that the results secured from their exhibit
were unfortunately very unsatisfactory. Many deal-
ers whom we know in the east didn't budge from their
respective warerooms. Trying to ascertain some of
the reasons why they didn't we found the following
comments prevailed. To begin with, many of these
dealers had had very slow business in the early spring
and they felt that the expense to go to the Conven-
tion was not warranted, and secondly, because they
had plenty of stock on their wareroom floor and
would be able to find out whatever was new after
the Convention was over. In fact, some of the new
THE MUSIC TRADE REVIEW, AUGUST, 1953