What were the purpose of subsidiary record companies...

[michel1969]

Artistic purposes ? Hard to tell that Jazzland or New Jazz had a different artistic policy from Riverside or Prestige...

Financial commercial purposes....? Don't know...

Every knowledgeable contributor is welcomed....

[Teasing the Korean]

Part of it had to do with DJs not being inundated with multiple records from one label at once. Otherwise, it could appear that a particular label was being favored.

[Stereojack]

Part of it had to do with DJs not being inundated with multiple records from one label at once. Otherwise, it could appear that a particular label was being favored.

This is true for when the labels were founded in the early 1960's, but by the mid 60's both labels were designated as budget-priced labels.

[Teasing the Korean]

This is true for when the labels were founded in the early 1960's, but by the mid 60's both labels were designated as budget-priced labels.

I was just referring to the general practice. I know that was the situation with Stax and Volt, IIRC.

[Christiern]

It usually had to do with having a product available at a lower price or geared towards a different market. In the early days, when 78s were all there was, companies like Columbia and Victor had budget labels. Sometimes it was important to maintain whatever prestige the main label had built up. It really had nothing to do with not inundating DJs with a particular label—I don't know where that story came from!

[Dan Gould]

Weinstock told me that for him it was basically a tax dodge. That is, he had so much money coming in from "hit" records, he wanted to keep the money in the business, not pay taxes on it, so he created other subsidiary labels.

[michel1969]

It usually had to do with having a product available at a lower price or geared towards a different market. In the early days, when 78s were all there was, companies like Columbia and Victor had budget labels. Sometimes it was important to maintain whatever prestige the main label had built up. It really had nothing to do with not inundating DJs with a particular label—I don't know where that story came from!

But Jazzland or New Jazz were NOT budget labels like Crown etc... it is true that Jazzland and New Jazz reissued some old Riverside and Prestige titles, but it was not on a budget kind of records : those reissues were good quality.

[clifford_thornton]

Man, I don't know what you're talking about. I lose count on the pressing bubbles from later New Jazz vinyl issues. Clearly they were often budget-bin reissues or "new artist" discs. Do you think Rene Thomas, Joe Harriott or Don Sleet would've been a "hot seller" on Riverside along with Monk and Bill Evans?

[Teasing the Korean]

It really had nothing to do with not inundating DJs with a particular label—I don't know where that story came from!

From what I've read, that was a concern for Stax, which was why they started Volt.

[michel1969]

Man, I don't know what you're talking about. I lose count on the pressing bubbles from later New Jazz vinyl issues. Clearly they were often budget-bin reissues or "new artist" discs. Do you think Rene Thomas, Joe Harriott or Don Sleet would've been a "hot seller" on Riverside along with Monk and Bill Evans?

Well, the quality pressing of the late New Jazz is very bad, right. But the quality pressing of the late Riversides is questionable, too...that does not make Riverside a budget label. I don't think René Thomas was a hot seller... But Dick Morgan, Roosevelt Wardell, Paul Serrano were not, and are on Riverside, along with Monk and Bill. It is possible that Jazzland was devoted to lesser hot sellers, but it is not clear.

[Christiern]

As far as I can recall, we had the Riversides and Jazzlands mastered and pressed at the same place (Abbey).