Apple scorns charity mp3
p2pnet.net News:- Would you pay £1.49 (about $2.80) for a charity mp3?
A group of big-name record label artists think so. That’s why Band Aid 20 gathered at Air Studios to record Do They Know It’s Christmas to help famine in Africa.
Corporate sites carrying the song include MyCoke Music, Tiscali, NTL, Wanadoo, Virgin Mega-store, MSN, Virgin.net, MTV, HMV, and Napster, as well as the official site.
But Apple’s iTunes flatly refuses to feature it.
Is this a case of Bah! Humbug, or is it something else?
Something else, says The Times Online
“Apple sells individual tracks at 79p but has refused to raise its price for the charity song,” says the story, going on:
“Because of iTunes’s dominance of the online market, Apple’s refusal to sell the track could reduce the revenues raised through online sales by 70 per cent.
“Millions of iPod owners will not be able to play the track over the Christmas period.”
That’s so petty. Even for Apple.
It’ll be interesting to learn what all the Apple zealots will have to say about this.
===================
See:-
think so – Do they know it’s Christmas?, Band Aid
refused – Apple iTunes don’t know it’s Christmas-time at all, The Times Online, November 25, 2004
November 25th, 2004 at 8:05 pm
Different response from usual. Where are all the Apple-ites springing to its defense?
November 26th, 2004 at 2:30 am
There is no defense for that. Not even the most outlandish Mac touter can justify that.
November 26th, 2004 at 9:37 am
I love Apple Products… lousy company. Obviously not in microsoft’s league. But their refusal to be flexible means that most likley their squander their lead in the digital market. As soon as the iPod looses it’s it factor much like the original mac, people are going to turn to cheaper, possibly less well designed products that give them the freedom to download from any music store. Considering that apple claim to make a loss on the music store and do it simply to bump up sales of the iPod, Surely it would make sense to allow other stores to use their Fairplay?
November 26th, 2004 at 3:05 pm
Apple would be smart to keep the song at 99 cents, but still give the people who made it what they want, so apple takes a loss, but then they’ll have the cheepest price out there for it, and maybe somebody’ll download itunes to get that price…
November 26th, 2004 at 5:20 pm
yeh. where are they? hehe
November 26th, 2004 at 11:23 pm
hmmmmm. What does Apple have to say about this? Did they give a reason besides a flat out refusal? There has got to be some reason behind this. Once you start going into corporate politics, I think every company looses its luster, even my beloved Apple
November 28th, 2004 at 3:26 am
What!? What is this crap? Apple refuses to give special treatment and offer 1.49 song..
This is news?!.. iTunes is about simplicity, ease of use and consistency..
Ask the Band Aid guys to lower it to 99 cents.. see what magically happens.. they get on iTunes
November 28th, 2004 at 3:28 am
The music store is profitable you fuckin’ peon. Your loose usage of the term loss leader implies that they’re actually LOSING MONEY..
Learn to spell.
November 28th, 2004 at 3:28 am
ninety nine cent songs.
got it?
November 28th, 2004 at 7:33 pm
Apple is by wankers, for wankers. End of story.
December 2nd, 2004 at 1:22 pm
If the problem is that their system is so built that you just have one price, then why not just split the mp3 into 2 parts and then sell them both, this would add up to £1.58 … I rekon that if someone’s going to spend £1.49 then they’re not gonna worry about an extra 10p!!