if those figures are right I'd say Universal is going to lose $160 million while Apple loses $10 million.dumb move.
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.
Universal Music Group's iTunes Contract
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
if those figures are right I'd say Universal is going to lose $160 million while Apple loses $10 million.dumb move.
Not that it matters if THEY like it...
I don't see any subscription service out there doing as well as iTunes does at the moment.
Setup P2P only trading in UMG
If they want to charge more (ie $2/track), it will only send people like us back to P2P networks again. If that happens, I'd love to see a torrent site called P2PUMG where only UMG stuff gets traded. Or better still, a micropayments option similar to Corbis, where bands & artists set their own pricing and remove the middle man (UMG) altogether. After all, that is what the internet does best, it removes middle people. I could see the day, where Apple actually promotes the indie artist and runs big public concert days. In Australia, similar to the "Big Day Out" series. Thinking even further ahead, if Apple were to buy one of the big labels ( I actually thought that EMI would have been a good start, though it has just recently been sold), it would buy them a seat at the table of the negotiations for digital sales. Well, a bigger seat than they already have.
UMG does not have the talent to setup their own digital site, even though they have seen how its done. It will be just like, Moto, Ericson, Samsung & Nokia have seen what Apple has done with the iPhone, ie they now have the formula, but they wont be able to do diddly squat about it!
If they want to charge more (ie $2/track), it will only send people like us back to P2P networks again. If that happens, I'd love to see a torrent site called P2PUMG where only UMG stuff gets traded. Or better still, a micropayments option similar to Corbis, where bands & artists set their own pricing and remove the middle man (UMG) altogether. After all, that is what the internet does best, it removes middle people. I could see the day, where Apple actually promotes the indie artist and runs big public concert days. In Australia, similar to the "Big Day Out" series. Thinking even further ahead, if Apple were to buy one of the big labels ( I actually thought that EMI would have been a good start, though it has just recently been sold), it would buy them a seat at the table of the negotiations for digital sales. Well, a bigger seat than they already have.
UMG does not have the talent to setup their own digital site, even though they have seen how its done. It will be just like, Moto, Ericson, Samsung & Nokia have seen what Apple has done with the iPhone, ie they now have the formula, but they wont be able to do diddly squat about it!
I hope that they don't drop off their music, but if they do then unless they sell their music for $.99 per song like iTunes and DRM free so I can use it on my iPods on some other service then I will start downloading any music from Universal from limewire or other such program.
Why they all can't be just happy and enjoying their $$$millions$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and leave us mere mortals enjoying our 99cent songs with our $300 iPods? and stuff.
oh right, lawyers...
As my teacher of Finance used to say:
Q: What makes a rich person happier?
A: More money!
oh right, lawyers...
As my teacher of Finance used to say:
Q: What makes a rich person happier?
A: More money!
Everyone just wants a taste, no big deal...
What also is not a big deal are ringtones, seriously folks. You'll get your silly ringtones for your silly ifones. (yeah i spelled it wrong, what of it, the other way is silly).
What also is not a big deal are ringtones, seriously folks. You'll get your silly ringtones for your silly ifones. (yeah i spelled it wrong, what of it, the other way is silly).
Fingers crossed
It would give Paul something to do when he eventually stops touring too.
jesus, why is it that every 2 minutes the music industry heads are announcing as LOUD AS THEY CAN that they're scared about something and trying to make more money... money money money...
EAT IT BIG 4!!!!
EAT IT BIG 4!!!!
I think that it's a delusion that companies have that people will ever want to step away from actually purchasing something...even if it is just a file, into a system where, if they decided not to continue their subscriptions, they would no longer have their music.
I'm surprised the record companies aren't happy. The tech overhead is a huge expense that they would outsource anyway, so why not Apple? This is the first time that electronic music store is profitable for everyone and they're still greedy enough to want more profit.
Companies should listen to customers as Apple does. Of course the record companies want to charge more, but if they charge so much customers don't want to pay for it, then there's no sales! Apple has negotiated a perfect balance so customers want to buy and companies get the money they would otherwise not be getting [assuming people would somehow download the music anyway].
If they don't want to play it legal, then they're putting out a message: it is okay to pirate music as long as the hugely overpriced CD:s sell well. That's the Microsoft way and I hate it.
Some more coverage over at Reuters..
http://secondlife.reuters.com/stories/2007/07/01/b1e7db9c08ec08bf6e477cec5e9115c6/
original here:
http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUKN0128300220070702
http://secondlife.reuters.com/stories/2007/07/01/b1e7db9c08ec08bf6e477cec5e9115c6/
original here:
http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUKN0128300220070702
this is totally bogus, its not apple's fault that they happen to create an awesome product that no one else can even match.... what jealousy on universal's part
i agree, they waste their time selling 14.00 cds that shoudl be 5 bucks, they are so dumb and i cant wait for this to bite them in the @ss
It wouldn't work because the iPod has been the digital music player for while, and the only type of DRM that has ever been available on the iPod is Apple's Fairplay. So the labels would either have to play ball with Apple, or sell plain MP3 if they wanted to be usable on the iPod. Until recently, none of them would ever consider selling plain MP3s. Apple not licensing WMA is what allowed them to take control.
The labels are only concerned about Apple's dominance in the industry because they're used to being the domineering ones. Apple is making it too easy to make them obsolete.
Major labels are dinosaurs. In the last few years they have turned into nothing but banks, and will soon be obsolete. Bands get less than half of what they did ten years ago for recording budgets - but the shareholders and all the other financial heads are making more than ever. Greed? noooo. This is just another example of them fearing loss of control. They work on the same business plan since 1970. How is that going to work 40 years later? Nobody is buying records anymore, and they cannot get past that. Its as if their Mrs. perfect was under their complete control but has now found another man. They are lashing out in anger randomly, and are looking completely foolish. Let them fall.
Jeremy
--unfortunately, big labels kept the music scene from being flooded with endless amounts of mediocracy, which is where we are now. Way too much music and way too watered down. I dont believe that 13 year olds playing sloppy, uninteresting music should be on the same platform as bands like Wilco, Dave Matthews Band, and many others who are PROFESSIONALS. Thats the problem with Myspace and many other music networks.
Jeremy
--unfortunately, big labels kept the music scene from being flooded with endless amounts of mediocracy, which is where we are now. Way too much music and way too watered down. I dont believe that 13 year olds playing sloppy, uninteresting music should be on the same platform as bands like Wilco, Dave Matthews Band, and many others who are PROFESSIONALS. Thats the problem with Myspace and many other music networks.
There was an interesting article in the business section of the newspaper sometime in the last week that tried to explain the continuing decline in full album sales. As a whole, music sales are down across the board. There is both a consumer and artist backlash against recording labels who have become progressively more greedy. Trent Reznor has also ranted about this recently.
With artists like Paul McCartney headed to Starbucks, kudos to him for trying, something is being done.
If iTunes were to start producing its own artists, it would have the advantage of being able to promote artists, whenever customers come to iTunes to purchase music.
I can see why traditional record labels are worried. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find too much empathy for them, as they've been extorting consumers and artists in every way they could think of for decades.
With artists like Paul McCartney headed to Starbucks, kudos to him for trying, something is being done.
If iTunes were to start producing its own artists, it would have the advantage of being able to promote artists, whenever customers come to iTunes to purchase music.
I can see why traditional record labels are worried. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find too much empathy for them, as they've been extorting consumers and artists in every way they could think of for decades.
I just don't see any other competing online music service being able to generate $160 million a year in revenues for Universal.
They either make a really dumb move and lose $160 million in a year or lose maybe $100 million by moving it's catalog to some other online provider.Either way they lose a LOT of money.
This is a bluff/bargaining tool plain and simple.They want a subscription model on iTunes or $2.99 a song..
It may be coincidental but this news comes out 2 days after the launch of the iPhone.Which is tied to iTunes.
They either make a really dumb move and lose $160 million in a year or lose maybe $100 million by moving it's catalog to some other online provider.Either way they lose a LOT of money.
This is a bluff/bargaining tool plain and simple.They want a subscription model on iTunes or $2.99 a song..
It may be coincidental but this news comes out 2 days after the launch of the iPhone.Which is tied to iTunes.
Announcement for Tuesday besides something related to G5 Powerbooks:
Steve Jobs lists Apple Inc. new business after;
1: The Ulmighty Mac
2: The Ubiquitous iPod
3: The Amazing iPhone
4: The Labeless Music Label (garageband gets an agent!)
Hope that Apple Corp lawsuit settlement panned out just right so Steve can start his new world media empire. Please save us from the stuffed pigs who charge us vast amounts of money to gain access to art! They try to make museums as free as possible so we can enjoy the works. Why am I shelling out $15 a CD to listen to an artist only to go to jail if I share it?
Steve Jobs lists Apple Inc. new business after;
1: The Ulmighty Mac
2: The Ubiquitous iPod
3: The Amazing iPhone
4: The Labeless Music Label (garageband gets an agent!)
Hope that Apple Corp lawsuit settlement panned out just right so Steve can start his new world media empire. Please save us from the stuffed pigs who charge us vast amounts of money to gain access to art! They try to make museums as free as possible so we can enjoy the works. Why am I shelling out $15 a CD to listen to an artist only to go to jail if I share it?
It's a start though, the stranglehold recording labels once held is being broken.