That may well be true, but I'm pretty sure these figures are US only, and the US != the World.
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 Now Number #1 Music Retailer
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That may well be true, but I'm pretty sure these figures are US only, and the US != the World.
True, but then iTunes is a global distributor and utterly dominates the digital download market. I'd be very surprised if they weren't ahead in most Western countries.
You realize 2 million tracks on iTunes are DRM free and have higher fidelity than Amazon tracks (256 AAC > 256 MP3, though most people would probably not tell much of a difference), right?
It's just a question of when the rest of the labels will suck it up and allow their catalogs to go iTunes Plus. God, they bend over backwards and cower in fear and censor themselves to placate WalMart because they are so dominant, but now that iTunes is MORE dominant, they turn up their noses?
Hey labels, the people have spoken -- and they want iTunes.
You also realise they're all from one label, right?
No, it's a question of when the labels and Apple agree terms. One of the reasons the labels are supporting Amazon is to improve their bargaining positon.
No, that's not why at all. It's to do with the avoidance of a distribution monopoly and creating favourable marketing conditions.
The people want digital downloads, that's not necessarily the same thing.
You're right, however two-thirds of iTunes' catalogue - including the other three majors and their subsidiaries - aren't. That's where the problem lies.
Apple and the other three need to get their heads together and sort this issue out.
I would have thought the place where the actual music is purchased and downloaded is where you count the sale. Think of all the other places you can buy an iTunes gift card from, you don't expect those places to start claiming to be selling downloadable music, they only sell gift cards.
Apparently not the ones I want to buy
I'm buying more from Amazon that itunes lately. Even etunes has music that's not DRM free on itunes yet...These are all pretty intelligent answers and I assume them to be close to accurate. Well put. A monopoly is NEVER good for the consumer. So, Apple Fanboy thinking aside, a little friendly competition is a good thing.
What the people want is digital downloads that are seamlessly integrated with their player.
Agreed, as it seems clear that such a move would only lead to increased sales.
I do wonder though what this means in absolute numbers. Did iTunes become #1 just because people aren't buying music due to the overall economy? How did absolute sales numbers do compared to Jan 2007?
Amazon does very well in iPod+iTunes integration.
B
The difference is Walmart can sell the cd cheap but at a loss, assuming people will make it up by buying other products at the store (loss leader model). The full cd is purchased and the labels still get compensated for the full price of the album. (I'm ignoring the walmart online store, just like most online music purchasers *zing*)
Apple sells albums and individual songs and generally cheaper than the cd price (at least the new on the shelf cd). So the labels get less money because the music is actually sold cheaper (ignoring distribution costs) and people don't have to buy the whole album to get the few good songs and a lot of filler, so even less money for them.
So of course they're more scared of Apple than Walmart. Apple gives the people what they want (relatively speaking, everyone know the whole drm and bitrate issue, etc). It's a new way of doing business and if it's one thing a large established industry hates, it's adapting to new business models.
1. No, they are from hundreds (thousands?) of labels. Just not a few major ones. That's not a small problem, but there IS tons of solid non-DRMed content on iTunes. Stop listening to the crap Sony/BMG puts out
2. We have no idea how much Amazon has sold, but I have the feeling it's not a ton. Maybe in a few years they will take a bite out of iTunes. Maybe more than a few years. Are the big labels really going to blow off years extra revenue in the #1 music store for the sake of a bargaining position? I don't think they will. Moreover, they have little legitimate bargaining position. Is it "flexible pricing" they are after? iTunes clearly already allows this for album prices, and Amazon single prices are 99 cents OR LESS. The big labels have no goal but to decrease Apple's market share... alas, in a year, Apple has gone from #3 to #2 to #1, even while Amazon was around. So the labels lost their gambit, are losing revenue, and all for no discernible reason. I think their abstention from iTunes Plus will not last much longer.
3. People want "digital downloads" -- well theyve had a ton of options for years (do I have to go over them all?), including WalMart. Some were even DRM free. And yet people still chose iTunes. With 128kbps AAC. And DRM. iPods drove much of that away from WMA-stores, but people chose that too. Why would people forego cheaper WMA players and stores for the pricer iPod/iTunes? People wanted that seamless, integrated hardware/software experience. That desire for seamless integration extends to digital purchases -- people want to click Store, hit Buy, and be done with it. You can't argue with #1. Amazon offers a compelling product, but it is a hideous user experience, and does not have the appearance of integration (even though the Downloader helps achieve integration). I have a feeling Amazon's sales are mostly from techies who know what a bitrate is, know what DRM is, and aren't afraid to use downloader/importer software to have their files traverse the web to desktop to iTunes to iPod. For the other 99% of the population, there's iTunes -- and the big labels would do well to suck it up, join the party, and MAKE SOME MORE MONEY.
its not the DRM thats wrong, it's apple's pricing policy. labels would give higher quality aac music on itunes, they do want watermarking and drm. so that it isn't emailed to other people and given away.
the biggest label issue is pricing. every individual track is 99 cents, which is pitifully low. even the biggest, or only hit song on a given album would be that price. so... they have been asking for variable pricing. but apple has been dragging its heels.
yes itunes is the biggest music store, but others are getting prioritized more and have better sounding music. 128 sampling is just pretty aweful sounding if you give a damn about how good music sounds.
apple needs to open up on pricing, this is why they are not getting full major label support anymore. because apple just wants to sell ipods and doesnt view creative people or companies as full partners.
apple doesn't allow others to set retail price on ipods or macs, and they are wielding the control over the music business and their price points. artists and others are feeling the lack of appreciation or love.
1. No, they are from hundreds (thousands?) of labels. Just not a few major ones. That's not a small problem, but there IS tons of solid non-DRMed content on iTunes. Stop listening to the crap Sony/BMG puts out
For the other 99% of the population, there's iTunes -- and the big labels would do well to suck it up, join the party, and MAKE SOME MORE MONEY.
yes there are alot of labels, but SONY BMG is actually run by people who give a crap about music and artists. Clive Davis is the last of the old school record men who cares about he music and artists.
as for labels joining itunes, they are there. it's just apple not allowing variable pricing on singles is pushing them away. to most artists and business people. should a song like the new madonna single, or the new usher hit song, be available for 99 cents, or should it be $1.49 or $1.99, the one size fits all pricing doesn't work in today's environment.
most people in the public have no appreciation for how much it costs to record an album, promote it, market it or even do music videos. even a modest price change would help artists.
Oh no! The Microsoft of Music! Only way to go now is down!
I suppose they could put a few of the digital stores completely out of business first!
I suppose they could put a few of the digital stores completely out of business first!
According to Warwick's Bandsoc studio time seems to be about £200/day. So you can record an album for £1000 or so. Selling an album for £5 on iTunes means you need to sell about 300 copies to break even.