The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

It should be easy to compare the drawing with others showing Montross gramophones from 1897/98, for example concerning the shape of the funnel. Do you have any?

I only have access to a few papers, mostly lacking the advertising supplement. As you can see from the ads below, Seaman supplied several dozen dealers in New York City alone which brings me back to the question who manufactured the required machines. On the second ad the previously avoided term "Berliner" returns, though microscopically small. Perhaps George is right and Seaman bought from Emile Berliner again.

The first ad is from October, the second from December 1899, both from the New York Times.

Starkton wrote:It should be easy to compare the drawing with others showing Montross gramophones from 1897/98, for example concerning the shape of the funnel. Do you have any?

I only have access to a few papers, mostly lacking the advertising supplement. As you can see from the ads below, Seaman supplied several dozen dealers in New York City alone which brings me back to the question who manufactured the required machines. On the second ad the previously avoided term "Berliner" returns, though microscopically small. Perhaps George is right and Seaman bought from Emile Berliner again.

The first ad is from October, the second from December 1899, both from the New York Times.

"Perhaps George is right and Seaman bought from Emile Berliner again." I must have miss that.

Why is it so difficult to understand Seaman was a very savvy business man and promoter. This is a man who was the sole national (and some) wholesaler.

Seaman had been the sole supplier of the Gramophone since 1896, and therefore, already had several Christmas sales periods under his belt.
That, along with increasing sales (across the country and beyond), allowed him the knowledge of how many "units" he needed to have in stock to carry him up to Christmas and beyond.

Berliner ceased supplying seaman in October. Six weeks before Christmas.

Seaman would have already had his stock in hand. He would have needed the time to ensure "all" the retailers were stock to their roofs with the expectation of a banner Christmas rush. This means given the logistics of the day....time was needed. Not like today.
Retailers (even today), over order with the anticipation of fantastic sales. This, along withe Seaman's mastery of advertising and hype ads....I find it very easy to believe Seaman had ample stock on hand to carry his "retailers" into the new year and beyond.

Not to mention, stock on hand for defective "returns" and or parts, etc...

I believe, because of this large stock on hand and the knowledge he planed to introduce his own Zonophone in the near future, he reduced the price to $18 as a "push".

Seaman's agenda was to get his own machine out at a cheaper price, so he also did not want to get caught with any leftover stock of these "now" outdated model Gramophone's.

This would include "any and all" remaining models he had left over in his warehouse. This may have included unsold JS & Montross model's, etc....

As a master salesman, his thinking would have been..... better to cut your profit margin some, than lose all of it sitting in dead model's that you are no longer handling.

There was no need for him to have a "copy" Berliner made. In fact, just the opposite......"get rid of them" would have been on his mind.

I would not be surprise that all the retailers were fully aware of the split between Berliner & Seaman.

In fact, I find the Meyer ad interesting and wonder why they were closing their "Olive St." location and consolidating into one location at N. Main St.
Were they downsizing in part due to the uncertain climate of supply..??. Or was this in order to have a larger location.

After Christmas, retailers are faced with a lull in sales, even today. The first few months of 1900 would have allowed Seaman time to clean house of whatever was left and in time to introduce his own model.

I also believe Meyers reused an old (2-3 years) eletro/engraving of a (possible) Montross in order to save on advertising costs and perhaps the knowledge the Gramophone was soon to be replaced. This could be proven if Meyer (later) used an image of a Zonophone.

gramophone78 wrote:Berliner ceased supplying seaman in October. Six weeks before Christmas.

In fact almost 12 weeks before Christmas. Seaman placed his last order on October 2nd. This is what Kinnear and Bayly found out, perhaps from EMI files. Do you have other data?

To fill our theoretical debate with life: Do we know if Seaman placed weekly or monthly orders and how large these orders were?

Starkton wrote:

gramophone78 wrote:Berliner ceased supplying seaman in October. Six weeks before Christmas.

In fact almost 12 weeks before Christmas. Seaman placed his last order on October 2nd. This is what Kinnear and Bayly found out, perhaps from EMI files. Do you have other data?

To fill our theoretical debates with life: Do we know if Seaman placed weekly or monthly orders and how large these orders were?

Stephan, Do you not agree that in order for the retailers to have stock in hand across the nation and beyond, plus the fact that customers would have purchased "their" Christmas Gramophone at least a week or two prior to the actual day of Christmas.....only six or less weeks were left in order for Seaman to have "everything" in place across the country for the biggest and most advertised season of the year for sales..??.

As a person well versed in retail myself...I see this as something that is still practiced to this very day.

As for the rest of the data....I'm sure a member like George or Allen can enlighten us further.

Although Frank Seaman's contract did not give him exclusive U.S. sales rights for the Gramophone (sales rights for Maryland and Washington D.C. were reserved for the United States Gramophone Company), Seaman's orders must account for the vast majority of Berliner's wholesale business. (Keep in mind that machines were also exported to the Gramophone Company.)

Many years ago, Ray Wile compiled the wholesale sales figures of the Berliner Gramophone Company and these were published in an ARSC Journal. There were monthly figures available from United States Gramophone Company documents, and these show wholesale purchasing clipping right along through late 1899 and early 1900:

October 1899: 957 machines

November 1899: 1359 machines

December 1899: 2071 machines

January 1900: 1164 machines

February 1900: 1060 machines

March 1900: 801 machines

April 1900: 29 machines

We have all been led to believe that Seaman's orders ceased in October 1899, and that he had a virtual exclusive contract for U.S. Berliner sales. So the mystery is: who was buying all these Berliners? I have no documentation to support it, but the evidence we have strongly suggests that National Gramophone Corp. was dealing directly with Berliner.

I'd appreciate someone answering this question for us!

George P.

phonogfp wrote:Although Frank Seaman's contract did not give him exclusive U.S. sales rights for the Gramophone (sales rights for Maryland and Washington D.C. were reserved for the United States Gramophone Company), Seaman's orders must account for the vast majority of Berliner's wholesale business. (Keep in mind that machines were also exported to the Gramophone Company.)

Many years ago, Ray Wile compiled the wholesale sales figures of the Berliner Gramophone Company and these were published in an ARSC Journal. There were monthly figures available from United States Gramophone Company documents, and these show wholesale purchasing clipping right along through late 1899 and early 1900:

October 1899: 957 machines

November 1899: 1359 machines

December 1899: 2071 machines

January 1900: 1164 machines

February 1900: 1060 machines

March 1900: 801 machines

April 1900: 29 machines

We have all been led to believe that Seaman's orders ceased in October 1899, and that he had a virtual exclusive contract for U.S. Berliner sales. So the mystery is: who was buying all these Berliners? I have no documentation to support it, but the evidence we have strongly suggests that National Gramophone Corp. was dealing directly with Berliner.

I'd appreciate someone answering this question for us!

George P.

George, Thank you for the correction regarding USGC having Maryland & Washington D.C. territory's.

(Deleted due to error on my part)

What about Canada, Mexico, etc....?.

Thank you George. As could be expected the largest wholesale figures were through the winter months of November till up and including February, at exactly the time when Seaman should have ceased his orders. This sounds illogical indeed.

By the way, at least from December 16, 1899, the Nordheimer Piano and Music Co. Ltd. of Toronto, Canada, sold "New Style 20" gramophones, price $15 including one record. Anybody heard of these?

gramophone78 wrote: If I understand what you wrote. The USGC had ordered 4594 Gramophone's between the months of Nov. - Jan. and as you mentioned, USGC was only a small portion of the overall wholesale sales compared to Seaman.

The figures were taken from USGC documents, which covered ALL the wholesale orders for Berliner Gramophones. The figures Ray cited were totals. Keep in mind that only about 35,000 Berliner Improved Gramophones were ever manufactured.

Grand total of Improved Gramophones for 1899 was 12795.
Grand total of Improved Gramophones for 1900 was 3054.

George P.

Starkton wrote:Thank you George. As could be expected the largest wholesale figures were through the winter months of November till up and including February, at exactly the time when Seaman should have ceased his orders. This sounds illogical indeed.

By the way, at least from December 16, 1899, the Nordheimer Piano and Music Co. Ltd. of Toronto, Canada, sold "New Style 20" gramophones, price $15 including one record. Anybody heard of these?

In the 1899 National Gramophone Crop. Catalog (Aug. 1899). The improved Gramophone was known as the Model 18. A model 20 may have been the Canadian distinction.

Thank you George again for correcting my misunderstanding on the sales figures...

Ray's article (in 1979) also indicates that the last time Montross models were ordered and sold was Sept of 1898 (often used as Premiums). So Rene is on good ground with his comment that the Montross "Electro" in the Jan ad of 1900 was most likely use of an old one.

I also saw an ad from the same D. K. Myers (St Louis) for a 'Gramophone,' and the accompanying picture was an Edison Gem!

But still, the central issue here is why the date of Oct 2, 1899 is bandied about so much (then and now) for the cessation of Berliner shipments to Seaman. There may have been some misunderstanding involved.

It could have been that (on that date) Seaman had begun to press Berliner to start "ordering" (from Universal) actual Zonophone machines, and this is what Berliner refused to do. Even Court Filings sometimes get the details wrong.

Allen