PDA

View Full Version : Apple's future: Mac sales growth, subscription model?


MacBytes
May 14, 2005, 05:20 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Opinion/Interviews
Link: Apple's future: Mac sales growth, subscription model? (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20050514182037)

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by arn

JeDiBoYTJ
May 14, 2005, 06:02 PM
I dont see what all the hoopla is about the 'subscription model'... I dont mind paying $1 for a song I can actually *keep*

Kerry Sanders
May 14, 2005, 11:15 PM
I agree totally. I hope Apple doesn't go the subscription model route. Every one that I have seen so far only allows you to use the music as long as you are a subscriber. Once you cancel the subscription, the music no longer works. Not sure how they accomplish it, but who cares.

Here is to Apple keeping the $0.99 per song and I own it model. :D

killmoms
May 15, 2005, 09:51 AM
I agree totally. I hope Apple doesn't go the subscription model route. Every one that I have seen so far only allows you to use the music as long as you are a subscriber. Once you cancel the subscription, the music no longer works. Not sure how they accomplish it, but who cares.

Here is to Apple keeping the $0.99 per song and I own it model. :D
This is such a stupid argument. Having a subscription model doesn't preclude having the a-la-carte model they have now. It'd be a CHOICE. If these other services start seeing a reasonable amount of action and Apple's market analysis shows it's because iTunes lacks a subscription model, you can bet your bottom dollar they'll add one ASAP. It's about offering choices consumers want—if enough consumers want it, Apple will add it. They're a business, they want to make money.

wdlove
May 15, 2005, 05:26 PM
That would be fine for Apple to offer the subscription as an option. My preference would be like many others. Want to keep the pay as you purchase and own the song.

Kerry Sanders
May 15, 2005, 10:13 PM
This is such a stupid argument. Having a subscription model doesn't preclude having the a-la-carte model they have now. It'd be a CHOICE. If these other services start seeing a reasonable amount of action and Apple's market analysis shows it's because iTunes lacks a subscription model, you can bet your bottom dollar they'll add one ASAP. It's about offering choices consumers want—if enough consumers want it, Apple will add it. They're a business, they want to make money.

Don't put me down because of my argument. It is not stupid. I was coming at it from an aspect of Apple switching models totally to be like everyone else.

Now, as you mention, though, if Apple did have both models running concurrently, then that would be even better. People would have the choice that you mention and it would be the best of both worlds.

My point was that I hope Apple does not go to the subscription model to replace the current model. As I said, I like paying for the songs and owning them.

killmoms
May 16, 2005, 12:28 AM
My point was that I hope Apple does not go to the subscription model to replace the current model. As I said, I like paying for the songs and owning them.
Likewise, that's a rather silly fear (not stupid, that was a bit harsh)—Apple's proven that a la carte works. I don't believe subscriptions are a better model, and I know that Steve doesn't (he's said as much many times). Apple won't kill the business that they got into. Even Napster, et al who have subscription services don't have them at the expense of a la carte downloading—it's an option. If Apple were to introduce subscriptions, they certainly wouldn't throw away the business model that's gotten them to 70% market share of music store downloads.