This article at CNN Money makes note of unnamed music labels planning to up the cost of digital music from the current 65 cents/song. As the article mentions, The Steve ain’t happy about this.
The Record Labels are said to be comparing the higher cost of cellular phone ring-tones to the lower offering of mainstream music. (Can you say apples and oranges…?) The argument is made that 65 cents per song was used as an early price point to help gain adoption of the method of delivery.
There’s no mention of what the hiked-up price would be, or how that would translate to the consumer’s final cost. The obvious is stated at the end of the write-up, that driving prices up may only serve to send many people back to the Kazaa’s of the internet world.
What is it that the Recording industry doesn’t get? In this writer’s opinion, they’re just going to drive their customers away. Apple’s done an incredible job in hyping digital music and bringing tons of paying customers to the new age of music distribution. While still in relative infancy, the Recording Industry seems bent on killing it off – and for what?
I’m just a common consumer with no experience in the recording industry, but doesn’t it seem like Digital Music Distribution would be cheaper? There’s no manufacturing process, no materials – like CD media, paper booklets, plastic jewel cases – and no shipping of the product involved. I realize it’s bulk to the nth degree to drive those costs down, but compare that to putting the songs on a server for a place like iTunes Music Store to sell for you?
I think it’s gotta be much more profitable, and if it puts the idea of buying music at the forefront for more people who may be apt to just download it somewhere else for free, I think it’s something the Recording Industry should think about before they piss off all the wrong people (Steve Jobs/Apple, who are huge supporter’s, and their customers especially).
I guess some could argue that a move like this would make Napster type services more interesting, but I think the well-informed will know better. I personally want to own my music, not rent it – why do so many people illegally download music onto their own computers when they could just listen to it on the radio?
I can’t really say that I’m surprised though. The Recording Industry just doesn’t seem to be capable of changing with the times. They still seem to be about a decade behind where they should be in terms of adaptability. I wonder when the revolution will take hold of artists truly owning their music from end to end. I’d so much rather pay a little higher price if I knew the artist who worked to produce it was the one gaining, not the fat cats making the wrong decisions. So I guess stocking up on your favorite music while it’s still reasonably priced is the tip for the day.