In his letter to Sir Robert Cecil in July 1598, Thomas Morley claimed that he had made little money from publishing his music in print:

Although he may well have played down the value of his publishing activities in pursuit of a more inclusive monopoly, Morley's view has generally been accepted at face value and consequently it has been assumed that music publishing in late sixteenth-century England was unprofitable. However, enough evidence survives from England and Europe to examine the costs of, and potential profits from, publishing printed music around 1600, and to construct a speculative model of Thomas Morley's publishing business.

Publishing in the sixteenth century, as now, involved the participation of several people, each taking on one or more distinct roles and all of them hoping to make a profit from the process. The author or composer provided the text, the printer printed it, one or more booksellers distributed the book, either to other booksellers or to retail customers, and in a variety of formats ranging from collated and folded sheets to fully bound copies. Making the whole process possible was the publisher, who funded the production and took the final profit after the other participants had received their fees and profits. With the exception of the publisher, all the roles required specialist skills or trades; in contrast, anyone who could find the money and was prepared to take a risk could be a publisher.