Apple to Sell 37 Million iPods 2005?

[bigandy]

So what's gonna happen with this DRM. I just updated to tiger and when I launched iTunes it said I had to authorize this computer. Since this is my thirds OS upgrade, it now says I've authorized 3 out of a possible 5 computers! I've only got the one computer. What happens when I upgrrade a again, then get a new computer or something? I think many people may be in the same boat and discover they''ve basically just deactivated thousands of dollars of songs. There's gonna be some pissed folks out there in a year or two.

you're meant to DEAUTHORISE your iTunes before selling / wiping your computer, which goes to the apple store and says "ok that machine doesn't exist now" and you're back to 5/5 or 4/5.

if you get stuck and haven't done this, then phone Apple and they'll reset it. but you'll have to add your authorised devices again.

 

[Lacero]

If they want to increase music downloads, they'll need to lower prices to 79¢ and strip off DRM.

That is why I am increasingly buying my music from allofmp3.com

 

[gugy]

I think increase album prices is complete suicide. For me I only purchase one album on itunes so far. I rather pay few extra bucks and get a physical used cd with better quality and artwork.
IMHO albums actualy should be cheaper maybe $5 to $7 that way it would promote sales. If I go to Amoeba Store and buy an used cd I'll pay sometimes less than $9 and get a cd. I rather do that than buy at Itunes.
The biggest perk of Itunes is when you just want to buy 1 or 2 songs for an album and discover new music.
The music industry is loaded with greed bastards. CDs should cost $7 by now and not $18 to $22. that's a total rip off. And they don't understand when people rather go to piracy. Itunes is a great legit way to buy music and they still not happy about it. Screw the music industry! Viva Itunes and musicians!

 

[ioinc]

You are exactly right here, ideally they want to find the point of max profits, messing with the prices to see at what price point people will stop buying.

This works well consumable product, but the electronic industry has not been very successful with this pricing method. The main reason is because we all can shop around and price compare and there is always someone willing to undercut the next guy and you can have it shipped to you.

It this much harder to do with consumables, you are not going to cross the country to by gas at the cheapest station in the country or go to cheapest grocery store.

I think the music industry will have the same issue since every subscription service is will to under cut the next. And as we all know we can get our music free if we want.

Correct.

But what is the most profitable price point for the record industry.

Odds are that apple did not hit the perfect price point right out of the box. (life just does not work that way)

It may be wise to test 75 cents a song as well as $1.25.
For obvious reasons the industry is more eager to test the higher number.

Unless you test, you don't know what will happen.

 

[solvs]

That is why I am increasingly buying my music from allofmp3.com

Legalities aside, do you really think any of your music goes to the artist? You might as well d/l from P2P. Not that I'm advocating that.

 

[Maestro64]

Correct.

But what is the most profitable price point for the record industry.

Odds are that apple did not hit the perfect price point right out of the box. (life just does not work that way)

It may be wise to test 75 cents a song as well as $1.25.
For obvious reasons the industry is more eager to test the higher number.

Unless you test, you don't know what will happen.

I think the real issue is this, as someone pointed out records use to be sold by the single for about $.45 when they finally were taken off the market infavor of LP which you got 6 to 8 songs and they charged you more than 6 to 8 times that of single. The music industry try to telling us you paid more to get more since they were giving more than one song.

The problem as we all have pointed out is most of those songs were worthless to us. In a sense you were now paying more for one or two songs you liked verses what you use to pay for the single. The music industry also new this and reaped the benefits of your willingness to pay more for a single song. With that in mind the music industry has placed a higher value on a single song on CD since we all have been willing to pay more in the pass. However, this is only true since they were a monopoly, in the past there is only one sourse for song, it was the record lable. If you like the band you had to pay the record label to get the music, it was not like you can shop around to different labels to get the songs you wanted at the lowest price

So the real price for a single is probably $.45 but the music industry perception is more like $4 or $5 since this is what you have been forced to pay to get the one or two songs on an entire CD.

 

[Maestro64]

Legalities aside, do you really think any of your music goes to the artist? You might as well d/l from P2P. Not that I'm advocating that.

I advocate that the artist should start to distribute thier own music online, let get rid of all the middle men, they are just driving up the costs and this way we all get to reward the artists we like not the one once the labels want to promote, this way the likes of Britney and Back Street boys would never exist.

 

[winmacguy]

I really hope they don't introduce multitier pricing. Knowing my luck, all the music I want will be more expensive Also, if they increase the price of albums it will be cheaper to buy the actual cd from stores like Amazon.

And woo, first reply.

Well considering I submitted it for posting, I thought I should let someone else get first reply

 

[manu chao]

I advocate that the artist should start to distribute thier own music online, let get rid of all the middle men, they are just driving up the costs and this way we all get to reward the artists we like not the one once the labels want to promote, this way the likes of Britney and Back Street boys would never exist.

Yes, and farmers should market their produce directly to the producers as well in order to cut out the evil 7/11s.

 

[mugwump]

Bottom Line

oops, double post.

 

[mugwump]

Bottom Line

Digital downloads from Apple are 6% of net revenues of Warner Music Group. This is not a blip, it's significant source of revenue and it's only growing.

Does anyone know if the Billboard chart includes digital song purchases? If it does, how can any label pull out and drop all of their artists down the charts?

 

[p0intblank]

Damn... 37 million iPods. Now that is what I call a success. As for the multitier pricing, I was never fond of the idea. A flat fee of 99 cents is already a huge success, so why change it?

 

[Lertie32]

CHECK THIS OUT! - More evil music industry tactics!

OMG...
And now I know I am NEVER buying another CD again!


This link is about a news alert that Sony BMG (and maybe others?) is installing SPYWARE on its CDs!
What the hell???


It seems centered around Windoze, hidden files, and "manipulates the Windows core processing center, or "kernel," to make the DRM [digital rights management] almost totally undetectable on Windows systems.

These DRM files are almost impossible to remove without fouling Windows systems and could be used by malicious hackers to hide their own programs..."

Perfect. Now we've got the music industry resorting to hacking and spyware tactics. How much you want to bet that these do or will soon have interaction with UNIX/Mac operating systems too?!


If a company is ALTERING someone's OS and screwing around with system security they should be SUED and SHUT DOWN. Just wait until a hacker stays up tonight and writes some great new virus that takes advantage of these "rootkits" and starts a rampage of identity theft!!

Sony BMG is also the company that was at the root of the "payola" scandal this summer. BOYCOTT SONY BMG!!!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,174334,00.html

Maybe I'm ranting, but this could have MAJOR ramifications and at the very least is one of the most reckless and unethical business actions I've seen in a long time!

 

[Aliquis]

Aw yeah. I mean, just look at the specs on all the videos they sold in just the short time they were up. And that's to a lot of people who don't even have video pods yet.

 

[Maestro64]

Yes, and farmers should market their produce directly to the producers as well in order to cut out the evil 7/11s.

Your example does not work, farmers gain larger market share by using a distribution channel plus and an apple is an apple no matter where it is grown or the truck it is driven on. Apples have low precieved value so people will not pay extra. unless you are talking to vegan who pay extra to make sure their apples was not grown with chemicals.

In the startrack future when food replicators exist then you can cut out the middle man.

 

[bousozoku]

It's pushed the stock price, along with a positive day to almost $60, which with the two splits, would put the price at almost $240 in 2000 terms, after the original iMac made such a change.

 

[dejo]

I can get the top-selling CDs from Amazon for $7.99 - $9.99.

Here are the top two albums for ITMS US and their prices on Amazon US:

All That I Am - Santana : $10.99

Wherever You Are - Third Day : $13.99

Also, here are the top two albums from Amazon US and their prices:

Thanks For The Memory...The Great American Songbook IV - Rod Stewart : $13.29

Sings the Peggy Lee Songbook [DualDisc] - Bette Midler : $13.49

How are you getting these from Amazon for $7.99 - $9.99?

 

[ack_mac]

I think having multiple price points for digital music downloads would be a big mistake by the record companies. The .99 price point is symbolic (under a buck) and psycological. When you start charging people 1.50 for popular songs or artists vs. .99 for lesser known artists it is more greed than anything. If they do this it is going to piss people off and then people are going to turn back to P2P tools like bittorrent to get their music..

Then the record companies lose big... And if they do that with music then why not do the same thing with video? Hmm.. People seem to like this Lord of the Rings series on DVD, lets charge them $40 a DVD since they will pay it... Or, what if cable companies decided that if you want to watch Lost on their network you have to pay an additional $2 fee every week....

Greed. Economics 101 tells you that when you have the supply and not demand, you lower cost. I say wait until after the holidays.. There will be a ton of new iPod owners this year that have never owned one and will be snatching up iTunes songs left and right. I do not believe that the demand has leveled off.

 

[ioinc]

Times are a changing

I think the real issue is this, as someone pointed out records use to be sold by the single for about $.45 when they finally were taken off the market infavor of LP .....

So the real price for a single is probably $.45 but the music industry perception is more like $4 or $5 since this is what you have been forced to pay to get the one or two songs on an entire CD.

So songs should cost the same in 2005 as they did when 45's were taken of the market (1975?)

While we are at it I think we should pay the same for gas today as we did 30 years ago.

 

[manu chao]

Your example does not work, farmers gain larger market share by using a distribution channel plus ...

... and so do musicians when they sign up with a record company (and get into the iTMS).

 

[winmacguy]

thats a lot of iPods, good for Apple, the more money they have, the more they can put into making newer batter faster sweeter machines

IF Apple (and their component suppliers) can make enough iPods to meet the building demand this Christmas shopping season - (I have noticed shortages already due to Australian customs and shipping issues in Auckland stores) I would say that Apple will be able to sell as many iPods as it can put on shop shelves around the world. So in the region of 9 million+ depending on manufacturing capacity. As for songs downloaded, well I would say that will continue to grow in size accordingly although probably not to the extent that the music industry would hope for.

 

[generik]

Maybe that's why the rest of the mac userbase can't help but feel forgotten

 

[lolex]

Citing Jobs' prior comment, " Pushing up the price will make everyone lose, the online store is struggling to survive, "

He did tell we the heartily turth, Apple devotes great efforts on ITune in bids to correct the market's behavior, which hoping people would feels comfort to buy online songs rather than committing piracy.

Frankly , the situation's growing critically, big personal files getting traded too fast too easy an unforbidable way via broadband network, hence free stuffs everywhere is undebtalbe.

Big Labels boycotting ITune won't hurt Apple , just too stupid a way to get their doom come faster. Every little dime from Itune will help them breath.

 

[generik]

My fear is instead of giving in, they will hang Apple high and dry and pull our from iTMS altogether, and start negotiating with Microsoft instead.

Sure, iPods don't play WMV, but what if Microsoft starts suing Apple, saying as to how Apple has a "monopoly" in the music player industry, and is "exploiting this monopoly" to gain an "unfair leverage" in the music sales market?

Hey, it sounds convoluted but who knows, America's legal system is nuts.

That might be the end of Apple as we know it, and M$ will be laughing their way to the bank.

Oh, and if they get their way we will have Trusted Network Connect and a lot of "Trusted" technologies shoved into our faces. Good bye downloads.

On the bright side we can always migrate to some Arabian/Muslim country, no way in hell will they accept such technology, short of the Americans actually invading them.

 

[nborders]

I'll be one.

Never thought of myself as a follower. however the video, bbc news and more to come, makes it hard not to.

~n