[78-L] American Record Corp. staff photo

[Taylor Bowie]

Speaking of not posting...has anyone checked in with/heard from Mr. Barr in 
recent months?  I know he was having some sort of computer problem but was 
figuring he'd have made it back by now.

Taylor

P.S.  Somebody bought the ARC photo.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Lennick" <dlennick at sympatico.ca>
To: "78-L Mail List" <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: [78-L] American Record Corp. staff photo


Now boys, play nice! And here's what Geoffrey Wheeler, who still can't post
(reminds me of the Neil Simon-inspired character in My Favorite Year), 
passes
this along about the Scranton Button Works which became the ARC and then the
Capitol Scranton plant:

On 12/21/2011 7:07 PM, dialjazz at frontier.com wrote:
> Yes. It became part of American Record Corp. in 1929 as ARC’s pressing 
> plant. When CBS purchased ARC in 1938, it soon discontinued using Scranton 
> and instead used the Columbia Phonograph pressing plant in Bridgeport, 
> Conn. Scranton was left in the lurch and had serious financial troubles, 
> compounded by the dishonesty of Eli Oberstein, who used Scranton for 
> pressing his Royale and Varsity records and then failed to pay them. It 
> was only by luck that Scranton was able to avoid bankruptcy. Because of 
> its ability to get shellac during the War years, a number of small labels 
> used Scranton for their pressing. This included Keynote and Disc, which 
> contracted with Signature to do its pressing. Capitol then became 
> Scranton’s largest customer and then its only customer until it bought 
> the plant in 1946.
> Geoffrey


On 12/21/2011 7:35 PM, Taylor Bowie wrote:
> I don't have my copy handy of the Thesaurus Dictionary of Phrases,  but 
> are
> "needless fuss" and "conversation"  actually synonymous?
>
> :-)
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Biel"<mbiel at mbiel.com>
> To: "78-L Mail List"<78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 3:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [78-L] American Record Corp. staff photo
>
>
>> With all this needless fuss, did any of you record experts notice that
>> the phonograph's photo was reversed in mirror image?
>>
>> Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [78-L] American Record Corp. staff photo
>> From: bruce78rpm at comcast.net
>> Date: Wed, December 21, 2011 1:47 pm
>> To: 78-L Mail List<78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
>>
>> I was not talking about a more "Fancy" presentation, but a more
>> "Historically Accurate" one. Of course the item speaks for itself, and
>> really did not need the cheap little 60's suitcase phono as an
>> enhancement. But if you are going to include something with it, why not
>> make if from the same era in question, including some nice
>> representative labels that were issued by ARC during the same time
>> period ? It certainly would have made for a better presentation.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Taylor Bowie"<bowiebks at isomedia.com>
>> To: "78-L Mail List"<78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 12:29:59 PM
>> Subject: Re: [78-L] American Record Corp. staff photo
>>
>> The seller may or may not be a history buff, but he is a seller, and
>> offers a wide variety (currently hundreds of lots) of printed material
>> for
>> sale, with no records listed. For him, it's just another item to move
>> along.
>>
>> I'm not sure what benefit he would receive from making a more fancy
>> presentation of the photo...the item pretty well speaks for itself and I
>>
>> don't think whoever buys it will much care about the window dressing or
>> that it would make for higher bidding in the end.
>>
>> Taylor
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From:<bruce78rpm at comcast.net>
>> To: "78-L Mail List"<78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 6:12 AM
>> Subject: Re: [78-L] American Record Corp. staff photo
>>
>>
>>> The Seller, is obviously not a history buff, and his knowledge obviously
>>> ends with the photo. Why in the world would you display a 1960's-70's
>>> cheap little suitcase electric phonograph with a 45 rpm setting, next to
>>> American Record Co. Employees photo from 1931 ? A nice collage of some 
>>> of
>>> ARC's many Record labels from the 1920's and early 30's would have been
>>> much more appropriate, and historically correct. I just cringed when I
>>> saw
>>> that little portable there with the photo, it just looks plain silly.
>>> Unless you happen to be historically out of touch, like the seller. No
>>> big
>>> deal I guess.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "David Lennick"<dlennick at sympatico.ca>
>>> To: "78-L Mail List"<78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 8:57:33 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [78-L] American Record Corp. staff photo
>>>
>>> I thought Capitol bought the Scranton plant.
>>>
>>> dl
>>>
>>> On 12/21/2011 1:35 AM, Cary Ginell wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I don't know the connection between ARC and Capitol (misspelled
>>>> "Capital"
>>>> here) - they had nothing to do with each other. Still, a nice 
>>>> historical
>>>> piece, if anyone can identify any of the folks in the picture. I sure
>>>> can't.
>>>>
>>>> Cary Ginell
>>>>
>>>>> From: soundthink at live.com
>>>>> To: 78-l at klickitat.78online.com
>>>>> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 22:31:40 -0800
>>>>> Subject: [78-L] American Record Corp. staff photo
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.ebay.com/itm/1931-AMERICAN-RECORD-CORP-SCRANTON-PA-EMPLOYEE-PHOTO-CAPITAL-PREDECESSOR-/270816639601?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f0dedfa71
>>>>>
>>>>> It's too rich for my blood, but I'd sure love to see a closeup and try
>>>>> and identify Art Satherley and Don Law in the photo.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cary Ginell
>>>>>
_______________________________________________
78-L mailing list
78-L at klickitat.78online.com
http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l