Members in Chat:
BertieBot, Gildebot_LockHart | |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
| | Harry Potter News Latest news and rumors about the Harry Potter world! | Vote for SS! 
05-10-2004, 12:22 AM
| | | 
[img]http://www.snitchseeker.com/images/news/hp_grandpre_80.jpg' align='middle'> Harry Potter book sales fell in 2003 - Summary:
Scholastic found it hard to sell the five Potter books in 2003 Article:
Thanks to Wizardnews Quote: May 9 (Bloomberg) -- Harry Potter, who has made author J.K. Rowling rich, has hardly worked magic lately at Scholastic Corp., Rowling's U.S. publisher.
Since April 2002, Scholastic stock has sputtered faster than a hexed Nimbus 2000 broom. Shares of the New York-based publisher tumbled 48 percent to $28.93 on Friday, from a record $55.53 in April 2002.
As the bespectacled young wizard and his Hogwarts pals return to the big screen on June 4 in ``Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban,'' Scholastic is struggling to sell the five Potter books. Its revenue from the series has fallen the past three fiscal years, sliding to $50 million in fiscal 2003 from $200 million in fiscal 2001. The books accounted for 2.6 percent of 2003 sales, down from 10 percent in 2001.
Lately, some bookstores have been returning Scholastic's books and buying fewer of its old titles. The company reported an unexpected $6 million loss for the quarter ended Feb. 29. Standard & Poor's subsequently reduced its credit rating to BBB- from BBB, saying Scholastic was unlikely to pull itself into the black soon.
The new movie, from Time Warner Inc., is unlikely to spur Potter sales in bookstores. One reason: ``Azkaban'' was published in 1999, and many kids have already read it. Plus, Rowling has written two books since.
``Interest falls off pretty quickly,'' says Peter Appert, an analyst at Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
Scholastic raked in $170 million in sales in two months from ``Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix,'' published in June 2003. S&P frets the publisher is too dependent on Potter.
Harry fans needn't despair: Rowling is already planning the sixth of what will be seven Potter books. No publication date has been set.
| Bloomberg.com  | |
05-10-2004, 06:20 AM
|
#2 (permalink)
| | Crup
Location: Ontario, Canada Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,094
|
Well it's not like we're uninterested in POA... but most of us already own all five books. What did they expect... that we all buy 3 or 4 copies of the same book? (Although some people are actually doing this I don't really see the point in it.) The book sales couldn't keep up forever... they should be concentrating more on OotP sales and book 6 when it comes out... they'll make up their money... I think they put too many "eggs" in J.K. Rowling's "basket". She's an author for goodness sakes, not a golden Hen!  | 
| | |
05-10-2004, 06:39 AM
|
#3 (permalink)
| | Doxy
Location: Out of my mind back in 5 minutes. Maybe. Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 421
Hogwarts RPG Name:
Azzariah
Graduated |
Yea,
I think they are reling too much on J.K. and her books. Why would anyone but them from the store when they can either borrow them from a friend if they don't have them already or get them off of ebay for a dollar a piece or less. I had 2 of my books stolen and I wasn't about to pay six bucks a piece to get them back at a regular bookstore. I paid about four dollars to get the books back. | |
| | |
05-10-2004, 11:24 AM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
Location: IndYeah! Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 522
|
^^^i think both of you are right! | |
| | |
05-10-2004, 02:56 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 68
|
Wow, J.K better work on getting that book out! Now that I look back on it, maybe I should have bought my friend the poa book for her birthday instead of the 5pack of lip gloss  | |
| | |
05-10-2004, 11:39 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
Location: 9, Diagon Alley Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,261
|
yeah so what if their book sales fell? they don't have to drag J.K. Rowling and HP into it. i agree Scholastic's relying too much on JKR. | |
| | |
05-10-2004, 11:44 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
| | Bicorn
Location: The Highest cloud on Loon-Land Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,805
|
Quote: Originally posted by queen_sorcerous@May 10 2004, 01:30 PM
Wow, J.K better work on getting that book out! Now that I look back on it, maybe I should have bought my friend the poa book for her birthday instead of the 5pack of lip gloss |  Lip gloss, my dear Girl what were you thinking? LOL (Just kidding)
Yeah, book 6 will definately boost their rating again, but like someone already said, you can't put all your eggs in one basket, JK is just one author, I think she has enough pressure, nevermind her worrying about her publishers losses too. | |
| | |
05-10-2004, 11:57 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
| | Doxy
Location: In my boyfriends arms!*smiles* Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 423
Hogwarts RPG Name:
Amber Willow
None |
I cant wait but I believe if the longer you wait the more better it is!!! | |
| | |
05-11-2004, 02:09 AM
|
#9 (permalink)
| | Bundimun
Location: Brazil Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 38
|
Quote: Originally posted by samanthalee1983@May 9 2004, 10:54 PM
Well it's not like we're uninterested in POA... but most of us already own all five books. What did they expect... that we all buy 3 or 4 copies of the same book? (Although some people are actually doing this I don't really see the point in it.) The book sales couldn't keep up forever... they should be concentrating more on OotP sales and book 6 when it comes out... they'll make up their money... I think they put too many "eggs" in J.K. Rowling's "basket". She's an author for goodness sakes, not a golden Hen! | I totaly agree!!!  | |
| | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On | | | All times are GMT. The time now is 03:31 AM. |
