PDA

View Full Version : Why Apple Won't Up-Charge Downloads


MacBytes
Oct 4, 2005, 09:25 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Apple Services
Link: Why Apple Won't Up-Charge Downloads (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20051004102513)

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

Yvan256
Oct 4, 2005, 09:58 AM
Tracks may be locked at 0.99$ but albums aren't locked to 9.99$ at all (why does he says that and then contradict himself?).

The "album only" tracks are really annoying, they prevents me from getting that track because I won't pay for a full album if I only want a single track.

Partial albums are annoying too, because if I want the whole thing I can't purchase it via iTMS.

From the comments... "For an even better deal than iTunes, try Walmart.com -- 88 cents per song at 128kbs, all WMAs."

Yeah, right. Like people are going to pay for something:
- locked into a Microsoft format DRM that won't play on iPods (most popular "MP3 player").
- with lower audio quality (WMA at 128kbps is just a bit better than MP3)

I'd rather pay 0.99$CAN and get the best: AAC audio quality, iPod-compatibility, easy-to-use iTunes/iTMS software.

mrsebastian
Oct 4, 2005, 11:35 AM
another one from the comments at the end of the article...

"What this article does not explain is how the publishing companies don't treat the record labels the same for all songs. For example, if a song is over seven minutes long, the publishers charge the record labels double what they normally charge them. So it is not that surprising to me that the labels are complaining that they cannot pass those costs on to iTunes and the consumer..."

lol, that's great. so you are suggesting we should feel bad for the labels, because they are getting raped by the publishers? ... uh no. they are all part of the same machine in the first place and substituting one greedy [bleeper] for another, doesn't change that they are all greedy [bleepers].

shamino
Oct 6, 2005, 04:27 PM
"What this article does not explain is how the publishing companies don't treat the record labels the same for all songs. For example, if a song is over seven minutes long, the publishers charge the record labels double what they normally charge them.
???? Last I heard, publishers charge by the CD, not by the song.

And in the case of the major labels, the publishers are just a different division of the same company, so it's all just budget shuffling and doesn't mean a thing.
So it is not that surprising to me that the labels are complaining that they cannot pass those costs on to iTunes and the consumer..."
Except these kinds of costs are passed on. Ever notice how tracks longer than about 7 minutes are only available as "album only" tracks? Typically on albums with a low-enough track count or a high-enough price so that the per-song cost is more than 99 cents.

For example, look at Tangerine Dream (http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewArtist?id=10507). Lots of long songs that are available album-only, with albums selling for $10 and generally having less than 10 tracks.