Only a few hours to go...

[plinsenmayer]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., Katze <jdumas at k...> wrote:
> davewitley wrote:
>
> > I can't see that keeping OOP back will generate revenue from the
> > eralier works; publishing it will, as we saw with GOF - many of us
> > here only noticed HP when it came out.
> >
> > I also agree she has no obligation to us.

Katze replied:
>
> I completely disagree - it's because of us that she no longer has to
> worry about anything financial for the rest her and her daughter's
life. Same with Bloomsbury - because of us, the fans who fork out hard
earned money, they are now in a position to search out new authors and
books.
>
> What do you think would happen to them if revenues dropped to 0?
>
> They may not be sitting on the book, but It is a strategic move to
earn single dime possible from the previous books. Doing this with
products not as popular as HP would adversely affect future sales of
the products, because consumers would have lost respect for the
company and the product.
>
> Like I said...I'm at a crossroads...I don't care to give them a dime
> right now, but unfortunately I'm addicted to the story, and this is
what allows them to continue take more and more time, because they
know we'll buy regardless.

Me:

I'm coming into this a bit late, having only been alerted that this
discussion was happening over here.  A few comments:

1.  JKR might well feel some sort of moral obligation to have her fans
told of the next publication date at the earliest possible time.  But,
as Pippin said, in the US, there are laws and regulations set by the
SEC that will dictate when and how disclosure of a "significant event"
for a publicly-traded corporation may be made.  I practiced
corp/securities laws for nearly 10 yrs.  Whatever JKR's beliefs or
preferences are or might be, the fact is that her publishers are
publicly-traded corporations, and in the US, this places some
strictures on what can & can't be said (and when).

2.  Securities lawyer distinction here: there are periodic earnings
releases and then there are annual reports.  What Scholastic had last
week was merely a conference call to discuss their latest quarterly
earnings release.  They are not a 12/31 fiscal-year company.

3.  I don't understand this notion that the publishers are trying to
milk every last dime out of the previous volumes before releasing the
next one(s).  That makes no sense to me.  Releasing the next volume
(and the accompanying marketing that would go along with that) will
increases sales of ALL the HP books.  For example, once the release
date is announced, the marketing hoopla goes into effect.  At that
point, lots of non-HP readers will buy the first 4 books because they
finally heard of the whole craze or are just now caving in to see
what's causing all this commotion in the media.  By contrast, right
now, as evidenced by the quarter-to-quarter comparisons of Scholastic
(haven't read Bloomsbury's reports), trade sales (including HP) are
either flat or less than those in the prior year quarter.  In other
words, the financial results are saying quite clearly that it's in the
best interests of the publishers for the next book to be released (or
for a release date to be announced).

I'm just not seeing that there's any divergence of interest between
the publishers and the investing public and the fans. Releasing OOP
(or announcing a definite release date) is a win-win situation for
everyone.

Penny