The BN "policy" of keeping things in print vs deleting them is apparently, according to Tom Evered, a function of their being a part of the EMI Coprorate Empire. The label is a seperate "cost center" (or as some businesses prefer to call them, "profit centers"), and it would appear that keeping items in print that don't move in certain numbers creates a "loss" on paper that has a negative effect on the bottom line. Which, as we all know, is what the money folks look at whether or not it really makes sense.
It's a little nebulous to me how you can continue to lose money on something once it's paid for and simply taking up shelf space in a warehouse. Hell, if you need the space for something else, put the items somewhere else off-premises, like in your trunk or something.. Create a form or something to keep track of where you put them and call them "Auxillary Inventory" or some such and create a "deferred value" for them. Or some crank-yankin' semantical/numerical shit like that. But however much you lose (or how much you keep from losing by remaindering the stock), it seems to me that you could make that much more over the long haul by selling it off over time at regular. But then again,, if wholesale price stays the same over the years, inflation might well make it more profitable to get a lump sum for a bulk inventory at a lesser price up front, as might being able to write off the loss. Hell if I know. It all seems to work within the culture who accepts it all at face value as being "real". Myself, I believe in god, so that's more than enough "suspension-of-disbelief-as-lifestyle-foundation" for me!
Whatever. It's the kind of numbers game that creates "assets" on paper that may or may not have any relevance to the three-dimensionl world. It works within itself, so hey. But like I always like to tell the Coyote in the Road Runner cartoons, "DON'T LOOK DOWN!"