cxny said:
Could there be a more despised segment of US industry than the record companies? (OK the oil companies a close second right now) Actually I would be happy to see tiered pricing but only if $0.99 was the upper limit and older back catalog was made available at $0.50.
But would you buy 2x as many songs? Or are you just saying you want stuff to be cheaper? See, because iTMS is a phenomenal success, with no apparent need to lower prices or raise them up.
By the way, have you ever tried producing a REAL cd? How about pump some oil? Exactly. You know, those people do work hard. It's not like they were born with the magical ability to produce stuff you want and aren't willing to pay for, or only pay for while "despising" them. Is it just because I'm talking to teenagers that there is this general air of "I don't want to pay up to the value of goods"?
D Duh, of course.)
Well, maybe you are a cd producer dj thing on the side and take insult. Whatever. People that don't understand pricing and value shouldn't just flap their mouths demanding cheaper goods. On the other hand, if iTMS were not such a success and Apple really was charging too much, I would agree with you entirely, since consumers have the right to pay
exactly what they think an item is worth, so long as the seller agrees to it. This is why you can negotiate at BestBuy or whatever for $200 off that big screen TV, but you can't hurl $200 less than the price tag at the employee and proceed to steal the TV. In this case it's a bit different. iTMS is selling tracks at $1, essentially. In theory, there is some price point at which they'd make the most profit. Unfortunately, people will actually hesitate more to buy tracks priced at $0.72 than at $0.75, or even at $1, probably, and anyway they'd hesitate a whole lot more at $1.49 or whatever. That period, when the customer is deciding whether or not to click on buy, is the most important piece of this equation. Hesitation is to be avoided. So, I wouldn't be surprised if iTMS's current price of $1 is also the theoretical optimum. To lower the price makes no sense, and to introduce variable pricing or tiered pricing means the same thing - missing the theoretical optimum by more than the current pricing does, to be sure.
Let's not bash oil companies because we pay them for their work. Instead, let's bash them because they hold government sway and the great US of A was never meant to be controlled in any large part by a group of corporations. There's a difference - as a business they should charge what they can and make a profit...as a govenment influence, they should hold no more sway than an equal number of voting individuals...instead, look what we get!
