Itunes to raise prices

[Easy Mac]

F* the RIAA

http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/...16144630.shtml

By Doctor Q

MarketWatch reports on a Wall Street Journal article saying that Alain Levy, CEO of EMI Music, expects Apple to end the one-price-fits-all pricing in the iTunes Music Store within a year, increasing prices for popular songs and cutting prices for music by unknown artists. Levy reportedly discussed the issue with Steve Jobs, although the details of those discussions were not given and it was not claimed that Jobs made specific statements about iTMS pricing himself.

From a Levy press conference:There is a common understanding that we will have to come to a variable pricing structure. The issue is when. There is a case for superstars to have a higher price.

Seriously, they've never had variable pricing until there's no physical medium to distribute. Let's look at this rationally. You can buy an album at Itunes for $9.99, but you get no CD, or you can go to the record store and get the extras for $14.99. Now, album prices will have to go up for the new prices.

And since when were old CD's discounted? Every old CD I've come across, except for those special edition re-issues for like Skynard or Sublime, still sell for the exact same price as when they came out. I really don't mind variable pricing as long as they don't raise the price. All this is going to do is make even more people steal songs.

So as I said in the beginning... f* the RIAA.

[McSweeny]

what a shame. i was pretty impressed with the way Jobs had been standing up to the RIAA and fighting against raising prices

[Draft Dodger]

it's been a while since I've bought a CD, but don't they do a sort of variable pricing now...except in reverse? seems like popular CDs get discounted, but your not-so-fresh CDs are full price. seems weird that they would take the exact opposite track for online sales...but, then again, nothing the RIAA does surprises me.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

it's been a while since I've bought a CD, but don't they do a sort of variable pricing now...except in reverse? seems like popular CDs get discounted, but your not-so-fresh CDs are full price. seems weird that they would take the exact opposite track for online sales...but, then again, nothing the RIAA does surprises me.

You're definitely right about pricing on real cds. Brand new releases are always discounted, while a regular CD will generally cost you a few more bucks.

ITunes is already overpriced, and i'm sure they will now step into the ridiculous range.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

it's been a while since I've bought a CD, but don't they do a sort of variable pricing now...except in reverse? seems like popular CDs get discounted, but your not-so-fresh CDs are full price. seems weird that they would take the exact opposite track for online sales...but, then again, nothing the RIAA does surprises me.

Yeah, you can get most new releases in the 9.99-11.99 range on release week.

[JonInMiddleGA]

.99 / $9.99 (or so) had been working pretty well for me.
I can't really see me paying much more than that for the PITA that is d'load, burn, etc. though.

But hell, most of the stuff I buy isn't (with the occasional country exception) what they're likely to consider top tier artists, so I guess it remains to be seen how this would affect me/my buying habits.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

But hell, most of the stuff I buy isn't (with the occasional country exception) what they're likely to consider top tier artists, so I guess it remains to be seen how this would affect me/my buying habits.

Same with me. I think I rarely buy anything that the execs and mainstream would consider "popular".

[Mota]

My theory ... $9.99 for an album is very fair, considering there is NO physical item exchanged, only data.

Anything more than that, and people are suddenly going to remember that they can get the same album for free on Bit Torrent.

Myself? I buy the CD's I like because I believe that having a physical item to show for my purchase justifies the cost.

[lighthousekeeper]

i'm shocked people still pay for music

[Ksyrup]

"...end the one-price-fits-all pricing in the iTunes Music Store within a year, increasing prices for popular songs and cutting prices for music by unknown artists..."


Awesome! So I can get the few popular CDs I buy a year at Best Buy for $9 or $10 on the day of release, but can download albums by a lot of the unknown artists I would otherwise buy for $15 (and usually have to order) for cheap? Sign me up! I might actually start buying downloads under this scenario.

[Dutch]

www.allofmp3.com

RIAA approved.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Mota

Myself? I buy the CD's I like because I believe that having a physical item to show for my purchase justifies the cost.

I was like that for a long time, a real collecter. Now I realize I only care about the music. I can't remember the last purchase I made that wasn't digital. Emusic.com has been a huge source for me the last 6+ months, they have a ton of labels i like so i haven't been reaching for a selection yet.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by Dutch

www.allofmp3.com

RIAA approved.

More like RIAA DISapproved, but still loopholey legal.

[bob]

Originally Posted by Dutch

www.allofmp3.com

RIAA approved.

What is the deal with this company? I know that they are Russian, so I figure the RIAA can't really go after them, but are they legal for the US citizens to purchase from?

[SirFozzie]

It's legal, as far as I know in America there is no ban on buying music from other countries. The problem is.. they use a loophole in RUSSIAN law to be legal.. but still..

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

i'm shocked people still pay for music

Do we REALLY need to have this argument on FOFC again?

[wade moore]

http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~fof/foru...music+download

lighthouse - read this thread first before even getting into it... for starters. i know there are more threads...

[Ksyrup]

I thought everyone did a pretty good job of ignoring it...until you.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I thought everyone did a pretty good job of ignoring it...until you.

Where's the "slap's forehead" smiley?

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

More like RIAA DISapproved, but still loopholey legal.

I'm not sure the latter statement can be definitively considered true. I still haven't seen anyone make more than a "maybe it is, maybe it isn't" statement about the legality of downloading music from another country that is legal there, but not here. I haven't really looked into this issue much since we discussed it months ago when this site first came up and the Russian decision as to its legality was made, but I have a feeling not much has changed.

I looked into the site briefly, and tried to search for about 20 artists I would consider downloading, and they didn't have a single one, so I guess for me, the point is moot. Certainly, the issue must be sticky if the RIAA hasn't come out publicly against it and threatened to take action against it or users. Which is probably all you need to care about at this point.

[Coder]

Actually, in Europe right now they ARE lowering prices of "older" CDs... New CDs range from about $20 per CD and upwards, while older CDs from less popular artists are around $25.

However, 2-3 year old "chart-albums" are actually being lowered, so that you can get an older popular album for around $10.

[Dutch]

If it were ILLEGAL, the RIAA will be more than happy to let us know and send some 12-year old girls to jail to prove it holds up in court. In the meantime, I'm going to download music from the Russian's.

[Fidatelo]

The way I see it, this is the stupidist thing music companies can do.

Popular music, which will be getting more expensive, is easy to download from BitTorrent. Less popular music, which will be getting cheaper, is hard to download because less people seed or even post it.

Savings to anyone willing to pirate music: large.

[Masked]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

The way I see it, this is the stupidist thing music companies can do.

Popular music, which will be getting more expensive, is easy to download from BitTorrent. Less popular music, which will be getting cheaper, is hard to download because less people seed or even post it.

Savings to anyone willing to pirate music: large.

To me, that indicates that the penalties for pirating music or too lenient. Most people don't steal TV's even tough the savings may be great; the problem is that if you are caught, the cost too high. Throwing the countless people who pirate music/software into jail is probably not an efficient use of government resources, but maybe treating them like hackers is a solution. Simply do not allow them to have a computer or internet connection at home, in their dorm room, etc.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by Masked

To me, that indicates that the penalties for pirating music or too lenient. Most people don't steal TV's even tough the savings may be great; the problem is that if you are caught, the cost too high. Throwing the countless people who pirate music/software into jail is probably not an efficient use of government resources, but maybe treating them like hackers is a solution. Simply do not allow them to have a computer or internet connection at home, in their dorm room, etc.

I think the cost of getting caught stealing music is extremely high as well, it's just not easily enforced. And unless the RIAA knows something about a big crackdown coming that I do not, I don't see it changing anytime soon.

So, ignoring the moral and legal points that have been discussed ad nauseum, I feel my point is valid. From a business standpoint, this seems to be about the worst decision they could make, given the information I have available to me.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Masked

To me, that indicates that the penalties for pirating music or too lenient. Most people don't steal TV's even tough the savings may be great; the problem is that if you are caught, the cost too high. Throwing the countless people who pirate music/software into jail is probably not an efficient use of government resources, but maybe treating them like hackers is a solution. Simply do not allow them to have a computer or internet connection at home, in their dorm room, etc.

if there were a way to download a HDTV i would do it. it's not so much the penalty isn't high enough - it's the ease of use. it's easy to steal music over the internet, a lot harder to put a cd in your jacket and walk out of a store.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Meanwhile, it appears that iTunes has buggered themselves, at least temporarily.

I start to drop the new Big & Rich album into my shopping cart & get a "need to upgrade to v6" message. Okay, no biggie I figure, I head off to find the upgrade. No upgrade in sight however, only a full install version. Okay, that happens occasionally, still no biggie & I start d'loading.

While I'm waiting for it to finish, I figure I'll zip into the help forums to make sure there's nothing wonky with the new version. Uh-oh ... wonkiness abounds.

From reading the forums, it looks like there's a glitch involving the QT installation with the installer package & a lot of people who've tried to upgrade are now stuck with non-working iTunes (having uninstalled their previous version as instructed by tech help) & can't access the songs they've already bought from the MusicStore.

So, looks like a risky proposition ... and if my choice is "lose what I've already bought" or "don't buy anything else from them", I damned sure know which I'm going to do.