powerboy said:
Stay strong Steve! The greedy record labels will never quit.
EricNau said:
It is very important that Apple keep every song at $.99.
I wish these darn record labels would stop being so greedy. When iTunes first came out, they saw Apple as their savior against pirates. iTunes has sold 1 billion songs since then, so that's 1 billion songs not pirated.
They should bow down to Apple!
Umm, hmm, no. Lol. For one thing, displays of gratitude should not be in that form.
And no, there's nothing wrong with record companies being greedy. Quite frankly, they may just be being stupid. That song you heard about from a friend? $0.99 = Just a click away. $1.29 = Let me think about that...maybe I can "borrow" it from my friend instead? Etc. My obvious point is that iTMS capitalizes on several points, taking one away being highly detrimental:
1) convenience - DUH. This is a reason record labels are grateful to Apple. To prove it, they provide their music for mutual profit. Greed made this happen, for all you silly ones that think greed is pure evil.
2) Apple design and ease of use - Sure, it's not as easy as it could be, but then, the ease of use does mean easy to buy, to spend, to make money off of. The competition is simply unsightly.
3) Pricing. #s 1, 2, and 3 all go together in making it easy to buy from iTMS. #1 puts the products right in the customers' homes. #2 makes it easy (and quick!) to purchase once the customer is ready to buy. #3 makes them ready to buy by giving them a golden deal that is rarely "too much."
Now honestly, I'm entirely against selling products for less than what consumers are perfectly willing to pay. But, given the phenomenal success of iTMS, which is only partly because of capturing the online market, I am willing to bet that raising the prices on some of those songs would inevitably have far less people purchasing them as an effect, over time (that is, counting the increase in). In other words, Jobs doesn't need to do the impossible and convince them to do the world a service and sell "music" (quotes since it aint even CD quality) for less than it's worth - instead, he simply has to show the record companies that their idea could easily produce a loss. Not to mention, be a pain in the butt to implement, possibly causing mistakes, pricing difficulties, slowing it down, lawsuits, or worse. No, rather, you can capture the online market AND get a bit extra by enticing people with the 99 cent price tag. It's simple math, really. So you make more money if you charge 1.29? No, not really. That's only 30 cents of a difference...in other words, 3 people buying at 1.29 is still less than 4 people buying at 0.99. And, $0.99, you don't have to think about, so that fourth person is much more likely to purchase.
In short, Steve's way makes us pay
more. If you are going to get yer socialist talk goin and start pointing to greed as if it is evil, ask yourself if you've ever bought anything. If you did, was it
really worth the money? Where did that money come from? Why isn't every product free? Aren't all material goods worthless anyway? The answer to that last one is most definitely no. Thus, Steve wants to capitalize on it, and he would rather that those simpleton record labels stay out of his way so that they can both make more money. The record label higher ups are probably somewhat insecure about the online market even now, but holy poop, their plans would cripple iTMS! What in the heck are they trying to accomplish?
And in the first place, I pay extra and buy the CD's, being a spoiled audiophile. (But from my perspective, it would even be insulting to see Britney Sphears or Fug Daddy or whatever easy entertainment being dished out by word of mouth cost more than music that sells itself simply because it is good, and doesn't get a bonus for being a social identification catalyst among teenie boppers. Lol...Fug Daddy.) But of course, that kind of thinking (that pricing would be insulting, etc) is absolutely beside the point. The point is that iTMS is making money well and the record labels don't recognize it's formula for success. That's not greed, that's just simply having poor business thinking. They probably are reluctant to listen to Jobs with any consideration because Jobs is that
other computer guy with the short end of the stick. They need to learn to listen better - Jobs is talking bling bling.
