Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple iTunes Australia - Oct 3rd?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
DeSnousa
macrumors 68000
I'm curious if the store is going to take of with alot of success. Think about alot of the Australian internet users are on those ****** $29.95 plans with like only 200mb of downloads.
Then you look at Telstra a major ISP and there online music store. Its **** and no iTunes surport and thus the iPod. However their store does not count towards downloads if your with them. This a large percent.
Then you look at Telstra a major ISP and there online music store. Its **** and no iTunes surport and thus the iPod. However their store does not count towards downloads if your with them. This a large percent.
zv470
macrumors 6502
winmacguy said:
You can watch the episode on this page, click on "Fair Go: Bruised Apples" under "Related Videos".
VanNess said:
Are you referring to the MAP suits? That was during the mid nineties. Funny thing is that other industries are using MAP now.
As for the revenue streams there are more aspects to this story than can possibly be explained in this forum and in my opinion the explanation is rather one sided.
DeSnousa said:
Of course you can use PayPal with a little address manipulation from any country in the world.........
Kind regards
Matt
(using itunes in NZ)
Xtremehkr
macrumors 68000
Based almost entirely on the rather slimy Michael Forbes, I don't have the greatest of opinions concerning the Forbes family enterprises. They do have a tendency to salivate over companies who are poised be successful, so this is good news for Apple. Forbes has been paying a lot of attention to Apple lately. Hopefully the switch to Intel will help Apple gain a greater share of the computer market as well.
broken_keyboard
macrumors 65816
zv470 said:
I watched that show. I think they are just picking on the iPod because it is a high profile gadget. They didn't have any evidence of massive numbers of people systematically getting screwed on their warranty, only 2 people.
And it's not even Apple who's screwing them, it's some third party called "Renaissance." No scandal here, move along, move along...
VanNess
macrumors 6502a
Kobushi said:
A popular song (a "hit") naturally benefits (and generates increased revenue) for record companies and their artists due to the number of units sold. The record companies haven't been clear regarding how they would specifically implement tiered pricing in the online store landscape except to say generally that popular songs would cost more and other (less popular) songs would cost less. Although it appears that nothing is too silly, too idiotic for these guys these days, I doubt if they are going to just sit there and monitor individual songs sales until it becomes apparent they have a hit - then press the price increase button. My guess is that all of presently established top artists on their rosters will roll out at the premium price, and for long established artists (Carey, Houston, Madonna, Springstein, Stones, Santana, and so on) God only knows if the premium price will to extend to older material in their catalogs, but its likely that it will (new fans of an established artists recent work are likely to be interested in the older catalog).
In any event, tiered pricing is nothing more than a wholly unnecessary popularity tax, and the sticker shock will become plainly and painfully obvious if or when it arrives. How customers will react is anyone's guess and I suspect some will just suck it up - which is just about the sum and total of the record companies reasoning behind it. I don't know what the demographics are specifically for the average online buyer at iTunes, but historically in the record industry, the lion's share of popular music is purchased by teenagers - who are typically impulse buyers when it comes to music. Whether that demographic (or the impulse buyer tendency) holds true for iTunes users is unknown, but I kind of doubt it. I think its far more likely that the introduction of a tiered pricing popularity tax in iTunes is going to cause a backlash and create a rocky road (good band name "rocky road" lol) in what has been up until now a bump-free ride.
If a backlash occurs (and I don't think the record companies can honestly say that the possibility doesn't exist) then it's not good for Apple, it's iTunes customers (both present and potential), the artists, and last but not least the record companies themselves. The bottom-line: if you don't want customers to file-share music (not paying for it) then give your customers a means and incentive to buy it (and increase sales), not a thinly disguised price gouging scam.
Detlev said:
I was referring to the MAP (minimum advertised price) suits. The record companies started MAP pricing in 1992 in response to discount retailers such as wal-mart. The suit alleged that the record companies initial MAP policies were legal, but starting around 1995 the MAP policies became illegal when the record companies "transformed their MAP programs into blunt and effective instruments for putting an end to price competition."
"In effect, the policies prohibited virtually all commercially practicable means of communicating discounted prices to consumers," the suit said, and "essentially ended retailers' ability to sell prerecorded music products at discounted prices." Prices for recorded music increased.
The FTC investigated and officially barred the music companies from the practice in 2000, but that resolution didn't involve consumer relief or fines. That led to the anti-trust suit which was filed in 2000 after the FTC decision and settled in 2002, IIRC
trinket
macrumors member
Aussie Songs
Out of curiosity, I decided to see if there was any music in the iTunes Music Store (iTMS) from Australian or New Zealander bands/musicians. I expected to find the obvious - INXS and Jet, maybe some Silverchair - three such bands to have had success in the US. To my suprise I found a lot more Australian and NZ music on there, including some of what I would classify as being smaller bands. Here is a short list of artists and bands I found:
INXS
Neil Finn
Jet
Silverchair
Brook Fraser
Jimmy Barnes (this really surprised me...)
Kylie Minogue
Tina Arena
The Beautiful Girls
Gerling
Killing Heidi
Missy Higgins
Delta Goodrem
Ben Lee
Scribe
AC/DC
Amiel
Kasey Chambers
Pnau
Ben Folds (Five) --> I included him because he is an Australian citizen
Crowded House
Frente!
Grinspoon
John Butler (Trio)
Natalie Imbruglia
Powderfinger
Shihad / Pacifier
Sia
The Waifs
There are probably more, but that's all my brain could come up with as far as names go.
Anyway - with all this music on there, why don't we get our own music store?! We have certainly contributed to the library, so why not let us buy some of it?
Even if it was to become available, how much of this Aussie/Kiwi content would we be able to purchase? I worry about the companies that do not want to comply with the Australian iTMS proposal (SONY/BMG, for example), and the home grown bands who are signed to them. Will we have to miss out on downloading their music, while everyone else in the world can download to their heart's content? Some of the bands signed to Sony are AC/DC, Silverchair, Delta (effin) Goodrem, just to name a few. It is scary to think that we will miss out on Pete Murray, Alex Lloyd, or Natalie Imbruglia, just because they happen to be signed to the 'wrong' label. If they open the music store without Sony/BMG content, it will be just like saying 'Here is your music...oh...but you can't listen to a lot of Australian stuff...sorry' - which is every anti-globalisationists nightmare because it is denying us a piece of our culture. Sad.
I wish the big guys would just get over themselves and co-operate. I know people in the music industry and after asking them about the iTMS, all agreed that they would like to have their music up there. Some I know already have their music on there. While they are signed with the labels who refuse to sign on the dotted line, they have absolutely no say in the matter because if its not O.K with the boss, then they have to put up and shut up, and miss out on making online sales and doing what is more important than any amount of money; reaching people.
(originally posted @ http://www.wink.ssxh.net/)
Out of curiosity, I decided to see if there was any music in the iTunes Music Store (iTMS) from Australian or New Zealander bands/musicians. I expected to find the obvious - INXS and Jet, maybe some Silverchair - three such bands to have had success in the US. To my suprise I found a lot more Australian and NZ music on there, including some of what I would classify as being smaller bands. Here is a short list of artists and bands I found:
INXS
Neil Finn
Jet
Silverchair
Brook Fraser
Jimmy Barnes (this really surprised me...)
Kylie Minogue
Tina Arena
The Beautiful Girls
Gerling
Killing Heidi
Missy Higgins
Delta Goodrem
Ben Lee
Scribe
AC/DC
Amiel
Kasey Chambers
Pnau
Ben Folds (Five) --> I included him because he is an Australian citizen
Crowded House
Frente!
Grinspoon
John Butler (Trio)
Natalie Imbruglia
Powderfinger
Shihad / Pacifier
Sia
The Waifs
There are probably more, but that's all my brain could come up with as far as names go.
Anyway - with all this music on there, why don't we get our own music store?! We have certainly contributed to the library, so why not let us buy some of it?
Even if it was to become available, how much of this Aussie/Kiwi content would we be able to purchase? I worry about the companies that do not want to comply with the Australian iTMS proposal (SONY/BMG, for example), and the home grown bands who are signed to them. Will we have to miss out on downloading their music, while everyone else in the world can download to their heart's content? Some of the bands signed to Sony are AC/DC, Silverchair, Delta (effin) Goodrem, just to name a few. It is scary to think that we will miss out on Pete Murray, Alex Lloyd, or Natalie Imbruglia, just because they happen to be signed to the 'wrong' label. If they open the music store without Sony/BMG content, it will be just like saying 'Here is your music...oh...but you can't listen to a lot of Australian stuff...sorry' - which is every anti-globalisationists nightmare because it is denying us a piece of our culture. Sad.
I wish the big guys would just get over themselves and co-operate. I know people in the music industry and after asking them about the iTMS, all agreed that they would like to have their music up there. Some I know already have their music on there. While they are signed with the labels who refuse to sign on the dotted line, they have absolutely no say in the matter because if its not O.K with the boss, then they have to put up and shut up, and miss out on making online sales and doing what is more important than any amount of money; reaching people.
(originally posted @ http://www.wink.ssxh.net/)
Hooray. It's about time the music royalty associations got their act together and settled on a deal with iTunes.
I would certainly start buying music again.
A bit off topic but I wonder if the 128kbps AAC they sell on iTunes actually good quality? Is it acceptable aurally? Or is it obviously compressed?
I would certainly start buying music again.
A bit off topic but I wonder if the 128kbps AAC they sell on iTunes actually good quality? Is it acceptable aurally? Or is it obviously compressed?
You can find several "tests" of listeners online and in general they found you cannot tell the difference between 128kbps ACC and CD audio on average home audio gear. It is good audio quality.ebunton said:
Of course with all things your milage may vary and not all audio types can be compressed with equal fidelity.
I could care less about the record companies that don't sign with Apple - let them answer to their shareholders who ask why they are passing up this market and related revenues. Hopefully there will be shareholders who are vocal in asking questions. Steve J might even help them out by announcing how much revenue they have missed out on.
As for me, I can live with multiple pricing levels as it will give me a chance to get "out of date" music, which can be fantastic. Make it 50¢ a song or $5 for an album and I'll start searching. There is more great "old music" than "new music" so I'll be happy.
As for paying more than 99¢ for a song - forget it. I see charging more than 99¢ as encouragement for illegal and/or personal sharing of music and a rather dumb move on the industry's part. Apple found a way to make legal music distribution over the internet legal, profitable and dynamic. It's time the record industry recognized that Steve J knows more about this than they do.
As for me, I can live with multiple pricing levels as it will give me a chance to get "out of date" music, which can be fantastic. Make it 50¢ a song or $5 for an album and I'll start searching. There is more great "old music" than "new music" so I'll be happy.
As for paying more than 99¢ for a song - forget it. I see charging more than 99¢ as encouragement for illegal and/or personal sharing of music and a rather dumb move on the industry's part. Apple found a way to make legal music distribution over the internet legal, profitable and dynamic. It's time the record industry recognized that Steve J knows more about this than they do.
I get the feeling that Apple is at the point where they will simply go ahead and leave out Sony/BMG, but surely if that was to happen Sony and BMG would then jump on board. I honestly think they are just trying to hold out for as long as possible trying to get their way (as usual), but once people start downloading from the other labels in great numbers, they really won't be left with a choice.trinket said:
That said after the number of false alarms we've had, I'm almost not allowing myself to believe it could really happen this time (Oct 3rd?), but hey after my country just lost the Ashes cricket series to England I have to be postive about something ... 🙂
xrayzed
macrumors member
Anything over $A1.50 and I'll put massive amounts of time and effort into ignoring the service.
I have hundreds of CDs that I still haven't gotten around to ripping*. At a $1.50 price point I'm prepared to top up my collection. At $A1.70 or $A2.00 my value-for-money kicks in, and my intention to purchase rapidly drops to a very small number on the "I feel like getting ripped off" meter.
* (It should be noted that, legally, ripping your own CDs is a criminal act in Australia - although I would be astonished if the record companies were insane enough to actually prosecute someone for ripping something they'd already paid full retail for.)
I have hundreds of CDs that I still haven't gotten around to ripping*. At a $1.50 price point I'm prepared to top up my collection. At $A1.70 or $A2.00 my value-for-money kicks in, and my intention to purchase rapidly drops to a very small number on the "I feel like getting ripped off" meter.
* (It should be noted that, legally, ripping your own CDs is a criminal act in Australia - although I would be astonished if the record companies were insane enough to actually prosecute someone for ripping something they'd already paid full retail for.)
You know what. I could care less about it at the moment. There are so many people with iPods around (in Oz) it must be killing the Apple execs to have to wait so long. Damn record companies. 😡
I can't wait for it to be legal
I'll be happy to pay whatever they ask for. (within reason)
I don't buy albums or CDs.
I haven't since long before I purchased this Mac and found out about iTMS.
Embrace the future is what I want to do.
I just hope that iTMS is coming with Kodak (but preferrably Fuji) print ordereing service for iPhoto.
And don't forget the books!
We've waited this long for the music, surely they have the imaging stuff ready to go as well...
I'll be happy to pay whatever they ask for. (within reason)
I don't buy albums or CDs.
I haven't since long before I purchased this Mac and found out about iTMS.
Embrace the future is what I want to do.
I just hope that iTMS is coming with Kodak (but preferrably Fuji) print ordereing service for iPhoto.
And don't forget the books!
We've waited this long for the music, surely they have the imaging stuff ready to go as well...
frankblundt
macrumors 65816
It's gone too quiet for my liking
Has there been any other confirmation of this?
The ads have appeared the same as the last time it was rumoured.
Any insiders with information?
Has there been any other confirmation of this?
The ads have appeared the same as the last time it was rumoured.
Any insiders with information?
trinket
macrumors member
pmoeser said:
There haven't been any announcements within the channel - or information or invitations to upcoming events - which usually means there are no events scheduled.
Of course they could just launch an iTMS without having a channel only event first, but because this is such a big deal I doubt very much this would go forward without some sort of channel event.
trinket said:
Since when has reading Apple Channel had anything to do with Apple's future moves?