The London label was independent and having a different logo than the British imprint. They had a number of hits which escape me at the moment. Margaret Whiting, Don Rondo ( White Silver Sands ), Mantovani, & more Your search for sound & video ends here! Jay Sonin, General Manager Music Hunter Distributing Company 4880 North Citation Drive, Suite # 101 Delray Beach, Florida 33445-6552 [log in to unmask] 561-450-7152 -----Original Message----- From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Pekka Gronow Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 4:47 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] US record business in the 1950s Lots of useful comment, thanks - especially access to Billboard on the internet (overwhelming). I still prefer browsing paper volumes, but I would have to cross the Atlantic to do that. Thanks! One detail: what was London records in the USA in the 1950s (see below) ? I am not clear on this. A US subsidiary of UK Decca?? The label also existed in the UK. How extensive was their business? Did they produce original US material? Pekka 2012/1/7 Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> > She was talking about the overall LP market in the 50's. Mercury > definitely sold more records in the US than London in that period, as did > Capitol. Classical was a part of the business, a bigger part than today but > still a part. A couple of pop hits could eclipse the whole classical > catalog sales in any given year, remember this was the time of jukeboxes > and payola-play radio. Classical didn't participate too much in that, but > that business model could generate tremendous sales behind a genuine hit > that caught on due to the paid-for exposure. > > -- Tom Fine > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roger Kulp" <[log in to unmask]> > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 11:02 PM > > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] US record business in the 1950s > > > I definitely see more London,Mercury,and Capitol,in about that order,when > it comes to 50s classical Lps after RCA and Columbia. > > Roger > > > > > > ______________________________**__ > From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Friday, January 6, 2012 4:23 AM > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] US record business in the 1950s > > After RCA and Columbia and their subsidiaries, the shares would fall to > smaller numbers. USA Decca would probably be fourth in there, but I'm not > positive about that. But my impression (not based on actual sales figures) > is that there was a second tier of "major independents" by the late 50's. > This included Capitol (which soon sold to EMI), Mercury (which soon sold to > Philips), and there may have been enough early-rock hits to Chess and Sun > into this tier if we're talking sales dollars or actual sales volume. > > I'm sure you know this, but many if not most Billboard issues are > searchable and readable via Google Books. You could also contact NARAS, > since this cannot be considered "sensitive industry data" by the wildest > imagination, given that we're talking 50+ years ago. > > You could also check European business press from the time of EMI > acquiring Capitol and Philips acquiring Mercury and see if any details > about the US market were provided either in corporate filings or in news > articles of the time. > > -- Tom Fine > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pekka Gronow" <[log in to unmask]> > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 5:26 AM > Subject: [ARSCLIST] US record business in the 1950s > > > I have been looking for data on record company market shares in the USA in >> the 1950s, but I am still puzzled. There is RIAA data on total sales, and >> a >> lot of (mostly anecdotal) detail on specific companies. Sanjek's books on >> the music business are helpful, but do not follow the development >> systematically. If I had access to all issues of Billboard from this >> period, that might be the solution, but I do not have them >> >> It seems likely that the three biggest companies in the USA during this >> decade were CBS, RCA Victor and Decca. There were hundreds of other >> companies, of various sizes. But which were the ten, or twenty, biggest >> ones? I am not speaking of shares of hits in the charts (this has been >> studied), but market shares - real or at least estimated? >> >> All suggestions would be useful. >> >> Pekka Gronow >> Helsinki >> >>