Quote:
Originally Posted by nate
A number of things come to mind.
|
Ugh, Nate, you made me look it up!
Check this article out:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1219...2_1571_leftbox
Quote:
Originally Posted by nate
1. That the "record industry" (and by this, I mean the big labels) claim to not be profitable through iTunes probably reflects more on their business practices than iTunes (who I believe have served up over a billions downloads.) As I recall, the $0.30 bump in price for popular tunes is nothing more than a "fad tax."
|
Quote:
|
ITunes has been the runaway hit of the music business, selling more than five billion song downloads since it started five years ago. But a growing number of record companies are trying to steer clear of Apple Inc.'s behemoth music store, because they say selling single songs on iTunes in some cases is crimping overall music sales.
|
...
Quote:
Label executives, managers and artists chafe against the iTunes policy that prevents them from selling an album only. ITunes, with few exceptions, requires that songs be made available separately. Consumers strongly prefer that, though Apple also typically offers a special price for buyers who purchase all the songs on an album.
Some artists see their albums as one piece of work, and don't want them dismantled. Their handlers believe they can make more by selling complete albums for $10 to $15 than by selling individual songs.
"In so many ways it's turned our business back into a singles business," says Ken Levitan, Kid Rock's manager. Mr. Levitan says the rise of iTunes is far from being a boon to the industry; instead, he calls it "part of the death knell of the music business."
|
I misremembered, as the article is not about the price hike to $1.29 per song and actually about artists like Kid Rock avoiding iTunes and making more money in the process. Nevertheless, it still verifies my claim.
No, it is not the business practices of the record companies which is crippling the industry. It is, in fact, a combination of lost profits from illegal downloads, and, well, iTunes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nate
2. iTunes isn't the only game in town. There are _many_ legitimate ways to buy music online.
|
Quote:
|
Avoiding iTunes runs against the conventional logic of the music industry, where it's now taken as an article of faith that digital downloads will eventually replace CDs. But there is growing discomfort with the dominant role iTunes already plays: The store sells 90% or more of digital downloads in the U.S., according to people in the music industry. At the start of this year, iTunes become the largest retailer of music in the U.S., surpassing Wal-Mart Stores Inc., according to research firm NPD Group Inc.
|
Yeah, and there are several different operating systems available out there. I use Microsoft Windows, hows about you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nate
3. My main concern is that the people who make the music get paid so they can continue to make music. Disagreeing with the practices of the music industry doesn't excuse stealing. Citing a lack of profitability doesn't excuse stealing.
|
I agree. I download because I'm a poor college student who doesn't have the money to buy a lot of music. But I like music. And if I can get a lot of it for free without much risk at all, why not? Ethics be damned...