APPLE's ITMS is a Hipocracy

[Chip NoVaMac]

All I can say is get a grip. You are the consumer and iTMS is not the only way to get the music you want. For some the ease of buying online is worth the it, not be hassled by some pimple faced un-eager underpaid drone.

Never did Apple say they would have the best price always. The ability to buy single tracks is the best thing about it, Some of us don't want every track from Janet or N.E.R.D..

 

[Mantat]

All I can say is get a grip. You are the consumer and iTMS is not the only way to get the music you want. For some the ease of buying online is worth the it, not be hassled by some pimple faced un-eager underpaid drone.

Never did Apple say they would have the best price always. The ability to buy single tracks is the best thing about it, Some of us don't want every track from Janet or N.E.R.D..

You dont get the point. People are complaining not about the price which is higher than 9.99$ but because it is possible to get the physical album for less.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

You dont get the point. People are complaining not about the price which is higher than 9.99$ but because it is possible to get the physical album for less.

Unless i missed something Apple NEVER promised EVERY album at $9.99!

I think you are missing the point that we as consumers have a choice.

So you would not have a problem in paying $9.99 for an album that contained only 5 to 8 tracks?

Apple NEVER promised that ALL albums would be $9.99.

More to your point that is the reason that we have other choices where to buy our music.

If price is so important for the purchase of an album, the RESPONSIBILITY is on you as the consumer to decide where to purchase. I could understand the comments IF iTMS was the ONLY place to but the album. BUT IT IS NOT!

I would have far more respect if the issue was that Janet's or N.E.R.D.S. albums were only available on iTMS.

Whether it is filler or not, it is a track. And Apple made it clear that each track is .99 cents.

So I guess many of you will complain that someone could get a Chevy Cavalier for $9,000 at a dealer verses $10,000 at ITMS?

Let the buyer beware! I repeat myself, grow up and get a real life.

 

[jxyama]

well, here's a guide CD Baby received. (but i believe this guideline is for all labels.)

http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=2221

Full albums are recommended to be $9.99 or lower

while it's not a definite guideline, apple had wanted to offer albums at $9.99 or less. since some labels went against this and apple didn't stand up to their recommendation (because apple ultimately controls what gets put up on iTMS, they could have said no to the pricing), i think apple deserves some of the criticisms here.

 

[bennetsaysargh]

Unless i missed something Apple NEVER promised EVERY album at $9.99!

I think you are missing the point that we as consumers have a choice.

So you would not have a problem in paying $9.99 for an album that contained only 5 to 8 tracks?

Apple NEVER promised that ALL albums would be $9.99.

one thing you are missing, all albums that are less that 11 songs are accordingly priced. a 10 track album is 9.90, to save 10 cents. i never said that apple said that iTMS was going to have every album for 9.99, but it's starting to get annoying how most new ones are not being included in that pricing scheme.

 

[mkrishnan]

Out of curiousity, does anyone actually buy full CDs off of iTunes?

I usually buy them from the store or BMG. Granted, I digitize them into my iBook and iPod, throw them on the shelf, and never look at them again except for the liner notes, but I still like having the liner notes. Who knows, too, what the next great compression format will be? Maybe I'll wanna waste another two weeks of my life ripping cds. I suppose I'd only change if the full CD is much cheaper in digital format, like <$5, or if the CD is out of print (in which case I probably would pay $17 or more for it. )

BTW, anyone have a copy of Shonen Knife's original album in Japanese that they wanna sell me?

 

[mrgreen4242]

Well people today being tuesday i looked at the ITMS to see what was new and to my surprise i am starting to see a huge increase in Album Prices. Look at the new N.E.R.D. and Janet Albums $16.99 are u Freakin' Kidding me. Those are Sam Goody rip-off prices. Does Apple not understand this is why people started bootlegging and illegally downloading music in the 1st place , because prices were getting rediculious. Worst off all we are talking a bout a Freakin' download not the actual CD for $16.99. While I understand that record labels have the saying as far as prices go, shouldn't Apple tell them no, you can't charge that much for a download.

$9.99 was the sweet spot and now it had just gotten sour, i can hardly find anything good for under $12.99 these days on the ITMS. has anyone else noticed this disturbing trend. I really wanted to buy all my music from the ITMS. Sh*t like this is the reason Apple will not meet their goal of 100 million songs in a year, and why i will be paying the my local Bootleg CD man a visit very soon.

What's even worse is all those tracks that are 30 seconds or less... and they still want a buck for it! The sample of the song plays the whole thing, but if you want to, for example, play it before the track it is a lead in for on a playlist, you have to buy it or the whole album. They should just give everyone those tracks to anyone who purchases any song from that album free. It's just plain silly.

 

[Highland]

while it's not a definite guideline, apple had wanted to offer albums at $9.99 or less. since some labels went against this and apple didn't stand up to their recommendation (because apple ultimately controls what gets put up on iTMS, they could have said no to the pricing), i think apple deserves some of the criticisms here.

Apple would risk losing the label support if they did that. Yes, Apple is partially to blame here, but ultimately it's the record label that sets the price, NOT the artist, and NOT the RIAA.

It is really stupid, because all the labels have to do is make it a little more appealing and convenient to purchase online and IMHO they'd stop heaps of piracy. Most people want to do the right thing, the labels are just making it so damn hard to.

 

[jxyama]

Apple would risk losing the label support if they did that. Yes, Apple is partially to blame here, but ultimately it's the record label that sets the price, NOT the artist, and NOT the RIAA.

It is really stupid, because all the labels have to do is make it a little more appealing and convenient to purchase online and IMHO they'd stop heaps of piracy. Most people want to do the right thing, the labels are just making it so damn hard to.

well, i'd rather lose such a label. apple should not accept it. now, label will supply an "overpriced" album to iTMS and will see that it doesn't sell - then claim that since even iTMS can't sell their album online, the entire idea of online music downloading is a failure.

i realize apple needs to keep iTMS song selections up with others, but i wish apple would use some of its dominance to put some senses into the labels...

 

[mrgreen4242]

well, i'd rather lose such a label. apple should not accept it. now, label will supply an "overpriced" album to iTMS and will see that it doesn't sell - then claim that since even iTMS can't sell their album online, the entire idea of online music downloading is a failure.

i realize apple needs to keep iTMS song selections up with others, but i wish apple would use some of its dominance to put some senses into the labels...

I think an easy solution would be to simply not offer the purchase album price for CDs that labels want to sell at greater than $9.99. It would send a message to the label (adopt our pricing scheme, or we won't sell you're album) and also still let the consumer get the singles off the disc for $.99. If they want the entire disc they can still buy it from a music store or Amazon or somesuch.

As an aside, what are we going to start calling CDs when they stop being CDs? We still call them Albums I guess, which is a throw back to vinyls, but they are still CDs... when more music is published exclusively via online distrubution and there is no physical counterpart, what should it be called?

Rob

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Out of curiousity, does anyone actually buy full CDs off of iTunes?

I usually buy them from the store or BMG. Granted, I digitize them into my iBook and iPod, throw them on the shelf, and never look at them again except for the liner notes, but I still like having the liner notes. Who knows, too, what the next great compression format will be? Maybe I'll wanna waste another two weeks of my life ripping cds. I suppose I'd only change if the full CD is much cheaper in digital format, like <$5, or if the CD is out of print (in which case I probably would pay $17 or more for it. )

BTW, anyone have a copy of Shonen Knife's original album in Japanese that they wanna sell me?

You have a point. I bought the "one from the Heart" from Best Buy becuase i loved the album. It was cheaper there than iTMS. Ddi I register a note of outrage. No, I voted with my dollars.

 

[Highland]

The problem is that there's only 5 labels that hold a majority of the music library. To lose one would be really, really bad. There's too many other online music services after iTMS's business to be making mistakes like that.

I think the consumers are the ones that are the most likely to force the change here.

Sad but true.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

well, here's a guide CD Baby received. (but i believe this guideline is for all labels.)

http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=2221

The guidelines;

o Full albums are recommended to be $9.99 or lower;
o Album price must be less than or equal to the sum of their tracks;


I see no problem the the whiners here....




while it's not a definite guideline, apple had wanted to offer albums at $9.99 or less. since some labels went against this and apple didn't stand up to their recommendation (because apple ultimately controls what gets put up on iTMS, they could have said no to the pricing), i think apple deserves some of the criticisms here.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

one thing you are missing, all albums that are less that 11 songs are accordingly priced. a 10 track album is 9.90, to save 10 cents. i never said that apple said that iTMS was going to have every album for 9.99, but it's starting to get annoying how most new ones are not being included in that pricing scheme.

Either look at the track count, or better yet take your dollars where it goes further.

What iTMS did is nothing new to a new market idea. Price it low to gain accepecptance. iTMS is still the best answer for buying music despite the whining her so far.

If you have a better way of doing business, the do it!!

QUIT SECOND QUESSING OF THE REST OF THE INDUSTRY!

There is so much more wrong in the world than a few dollars here and there.

 

[applebum]

I think an easy solution would be to simply not offer the purchase album price for CDs that labels want to sell at greater than $9.99. It would send a message to the label (adopt our pricing scheme, or we won't sell you're album) and also still let the consumer get the singles off the disc for $.99. If they want the entire disc they can still buy it from a music store or Amazon or somesuch.

Rob

So, Apple should decide wether the consumer can get the whole album or not? Why should Apple try to tell the Record companies anything? We, the consumer will determine the price. Apple puts the album up at the price the Record label wants it. If it is too much, we don't buy it and the label lowers the price. But, if I want that album and I am willing to pay that price, then I should be able to get it. I think Apple's goal is to get as much music as possible in the store. They leave it to me to determine wether I think a price is fair. Just because you wouldn't pay a certain price doesn't mean I wouldn't. The more choice the better. As long as they stick to .99 per song I could care less what the album price is. If I think it is a fair price, I will buy it. Just get the music on the store for me so I have the choice.

 

[adamjay]

right now i'd love to get the pearl jam "live in mexco #72" album from ITMS but its 25 tracks and not available as an entire album download/buy at ITMS. so thats $24.75 for the whole freaking album!!! ack!

i would have been suckered into that when i was 17 and if it were an 'import' cd, but this is digital, what the hell?

as for $16 albums of 10-18 tracks.. this smells like another class action lawsuit against the RIAA for overpricing of CD's

 

[jxyama]

We, the consumer will determine the price.

with recording companies, obviously not. if we had any say in CD prices, they wouldn't be $18 a disc.

the choice we have is either buy at their outrageous prices or not buy. we have no say whatsoever on the price and they don't care either. when was the last time recording labels decreased the price because CDs weren't selling anymore?

iTMS was great because prices really were more reasonable. i felt like labels were finally realizing that they were ripping people off and since people had alternative (albeit illegal) means of obtaining music, they would have to adjust their attitude about pricing.

but this shows they aren't learning anything. they just want to go back to ripping people off.

 

[Xacttech]

Unless i missed something Apple NEVER promised EVERY album at $9.99!

I think you are missing the point that we as consumers have a choice.


So I guess many of you will complain that someone could get a Chevy Cavalier for $9,000 at a dealer verses $10,000 at ITMS?

Let the buyer beware! I repeat myself, grow up and get a real life.

You can buy Cars on ITMS!!! It's the future of vehicle purchase, online vehicle downloads...

You people that are complaining that everyone is just whinning, making claims like "Apple never promised a $9.99 price" etc. Really don't understand.

The ITMS was NOT! designed on the premise of convenience, though admittedly it is an added feature to some, but it was definitely not the goal. The Goal of online music stores (aside from making money) was to reduce the number of illegally downloaded music. They are quite unsuccessful IMO. For me seeing an inflated album on the itms makes me turn to alternative resources. Further more the itms only carries a Pop music for the most part (Pop meaning popular, not genre) There is so much music out there that the itms doesn't carry that I listen to, almost but not exclusively.

In anycase if someone cant see that charging $17 for an album that can be purchased for $10 locally is rediculous I feel sorry for you, 'cause I assure you it's not $7 in gas to get to the store, plus you have a retail package complete with Plastic, CD inserts, and a physical disk. The music itself probably ends up as closer to $7 which is the increased rate of itms.

BTW, I still illegally download music, not in the masses, I just couldn't justify buying william hungs album

 

[FuzzyBallz]

Meh, what's the big deal. I've never liked this $.99 a track idea anyway. I like to buy actual products I can touch, ie, a CD, be it album or single, and rip them to AAC 320 or AIFF and listen to it through a good headphone w/ amp. AAC 128 will just be like listening to CBR MP3 trash.

Hmmm... this got me thinking. Apple should come out w/ iCinema where you can download chapters of movies you like for $.99 and $15 for the whole movie. See, that way people don't have to leech crap from P2P... Ok, maybe not for general hollywood movies, but it'll be great for gonzo genre porn.

 

[bennetsaysargh]

Meh, what's the big deal. I've never liked this $.99 a track idea anyway. I like to buy actual products I can touch, ie, a CD, be it album or single, and rip them to AAC 320 or AIFF and listen to it through a good headphone w/ amp. AAC 128 will just be like listening to CBR MP3 trash.

Hmmm... this got me thinking. Apple should come out w/ iCinema where you can download chapters of movies you like for $.99 and $15 for the whole movie. See, that way people don't have to leech crap from P2P... Ok, maybe not for general hollywood movies, but it'll be great for gonzo genre porn.

porn is something apple would not sell in an online store. can you say education market out the window? and im not sure about chapters because some people wont know what chapter they want.

 

[G5orbust]

Apple should have a "pirate these bands" list to force all labels that refuse to join the service at the specificed price point into submission.


----------------------------

But in all seriousness, 16.99 for digital music is crazy! While its not Apple's fault, Apple should deny entrance into the service unless a certain minimum price point can be met.

 

[jxyama]

Apple should have a "pirate these bands" list to force all labels that refuse to join the service at the specificed price point into submission.

ha ha, that would be awesome.

 

[mkrishnan]

porn is something apple would not sell in an online store. can you say education market out the window? and im not sure about chapters because some people wont know what chapter they want.

Forget porn, but I wonder how far off til such a thing becomes a reality? Then you burn it onto DVD or stream it to a TV? Would be pretty cool. Apple already has that Sherlock thing that locates preview trailers for movies, so now you just need to be able to buy the movie.

 

[agesaun]

I definitely think that the Record Industry would have to be one of the greediest bunch of bastards alive. Being a college student I find iTunes a very viable and legal alternative to pirating music. Yes ideally I could waste a few hours of my day commuting to the nearest store to buy a CD, but I am a student and have real things to do with my time like studying and working to pay for college expenses. Also I am definitely not going to pay $2-$4 shipping charge to have a CD delivered. As easy as piracy is, the music industry should be trying to make legal acquisition just as easy. By charging more online than the CD costs in stores they are effectively shooting themselves in the foot. No, I am not going to pay more just to get it online, and no I am not wasting my time just to go and buy a CD. If this overpricing of online music becomes the trend I might just ignore my conscience when I want a song and download it for free from the many choices available to me as a consumer. My dollar will not go to support their mission to try and prove a point. Maybe they need a few more years of declining sales to realize that they do not know what the hell they are doing and consumers want change!

 

[GroundLoop]

$2.50 per song?!

if you think that the new album prices suck, the major labels are thinking about charging up to $2.50 for popular tracks.

http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/0407downloading07-ON.html

so if there are 3 good songs, right there is $7.50. Should just go to Walmart to by the cd then.

Hickman