Headline FeedsTechNewsWorld Talkback
|
|
See Full Story
To the members of the Big Four record label cartel -- Warner Music, EMI, UMG and Sony-BMG -- music doesn't have much to do with music. It's a commodity they sell to the lowest (and therefore largest) common denominator. They've been seeing a decline in sales and are scapegoating P2P file sharers and commercial P2P application operators for their troubles, refusing to acknowledge that bad, self-generated PR, bad business and marketing strategies and decisions, and over-priced, cookie-cutter releases may have something to do with their troubles.
Re: Apple's Life Preserver Won't Save Big Music
Posted by: Waderz 2004-11-03 16:27:31 In reply to: Jon Newton
Since the advent of the iPod and the iTunes Music Store, I have not purchased even 1 new CD. Is this because it is easier to get music or cheaper to get music or because I can buy just one song instead of the entire CD online? With the exception of the third part, the answer is a resounding NO.
It is because that the majority of new music is junk. It isn't just the overpriced Compact Disc. It is the music. It is hard to find an exceptionally talented musician these days. There are some, but not many when you consider the sheer volume of new music. So many of these so called pop singers sound alike, look alike, and act alike. Britney Spears is no different than Shakira. Julie Roberts is no different than Shania Twain. So much music, so much sounds alike.
The majority of music on my iPod IS from my CD collection. I have bought music from the iTunes Music Store, but 99% of it is classical. The rest have been to repalce lost, stolen, or damaged discs.
The Record labels just don't get. And with the help of Apple, they never will.
It is because that the majority of new music is junk. It isn't just the overpriced Compact Disc. It is the music. It is hard to find an exceptionally talented musician these days. There are some, but not many when you consider the sheer volume of new music. So many of these so called pop singers sound alike, look alike, and act alike. Britney Spears is no different than Shakira. Julie Roberts is no different than Shania Twain. So much music, so much sounds alike.
The majority of music on my iPod IS from my CD collection. I have bought music from the iTunes Music Store, but 99% of it is classical. The rest have been to repalce lost, stolen, or damaged discs.
The Record labels just don't get. And with the help of Apple, they never will.
Re: Apple's Life Preserver Won't Save Big Music
Posted by: puggsly 2004-11-03 23:12:27 In reply to: Waderz
How does Apple get pulled down as the bad guy when they did everything right?
Believe what you want, but access to the major labels library of music was necessary for a successful launch of the iTunes Music store but so were reasonable DRM rules. So faulting Apple for opening the ITMS with label music is like faulting a new hamburger restaurant for using beef.
But what else did they do? They gave the same distribution deal to the indies as they did for big labels. The refuse to take money for preferred placement. They lowered the price of singles and albums and made it such that you can't hide 3 good songs on an album and get away with selling 10 other crap songs.
The only thing left is for them to open up pricing competition to allow Indies to sell songs at a discount and put pricing pressure on the big labels and I'd guess that is coming soon.
Apple has created a viable Online music distribution system but they do not yet have the market presence to dictate terms to the Labels. Give them another year to grow and spread to other countries and we will see. Online distribution costs appear to be around 20 cents/song at current volumes so song prices below $0.50 seem reasonable with albums at $4-$5.
ITMS it the correct direction. P2P is not.
Believe what you want, but access to the major labels library of music was necessary for a successful launch of the iTunes Music store but so were reasonable DRM rules. So faulting Apple for opening the ITMS with label music is like faulting a new hamburger restaurant for using beef.
But what else did they do? They gave the same distribution deal to the indies as they did for big labels. The refuse to take money for preferred placement. They lowered the price of singles and albums and made it such that you can't hide 3 good songs on an album and get away with selling 10 other crap songs.
The only thing left is for them to open up pricing competition to allow Indies to sell songs at a discount and put pricing pressure on the big labels and I'd guess that is coming soon.
Apple has created a viable Online music distribution system but they do not yet have the market presence to dictate terms to the Labels. Give them another year to grow and spread to other countries and we will see. Online distribution costs appear to be around 20 cents/song at current volumes so song prices below $0.50 seem reasonable with albums at $4-$5.
ITMS it the correct direction. P2P is not.
