Comments on: Fee-based music services

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 21:50:03 +0000

how interesting

whats it like to work for napster? hehe

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 10:03:57 +0000

I won’t buy it, but I love leasing it. Real Network’s Real Rhapsody has been great at $9.95/month. However, I may well subscribe to Napster’s new service. I love the idea of taking it with me on any Mp3 capable player, something Rhapsody doesn’t offer at present, but I hear may offer soon to compete with Napster. I’ll gladly pay $12.95/month for almost any song I can find–except for the Beatles and Arthur Alexander. Seriously, why would anyone buy it if you can rent it and keep it forever? Napster’s SuperBowl commercial may have been laughed at, but the math makes a hell of a lot of sense to me.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 12 Feb 2005 00:39:36 +0000

good article

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:04:37 +0000

well i dont have data for that.. but i applied basic principles of confidence intervals to come up with the figures in the 3 posts above yours : )

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:01:59 +0000

well i dont have data for that.. but i applied basic principles of confidence intervals to come up with the figures in the 3 posts above yours : )

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 13:36:41 +0000

I was looking at the music sharing figures here
http://p2pnet.net/story/3811 Top of the list did 6 million in one week. Times 52 weeks is ~ 250M or about the same as Apple is claiming. But that’s only one track. Multiply out by the marketplace which is not only fairly flat but has a very long tail and I’d estimate that the P2P file sharing market is at least three factors of ten bigger than iTunes and perhaps 4. That’s 1000 to 10,000 times as big.

Put it another way, iTunes represents 0.01% to 0.1% of the market.

Now these are back of an envelope figures largely out of my head. Anyone care to correct them and make them more accurate?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 13:22:37 +0000

given that figure even without error.. and the figure of 250 million songs.. that translates to a mere 10 or 11 songs a piece!.. so that’s the “explosion” of online song purchase? i guess the average song collection only covers 10 tracks in america… with those numbers i would be frightened as an industry exec, not proud.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 13:20:11 +0000

if their number of “legal downloaders” is estimated at 24 million.. it’s in error by as much as 50% (10.5 million)

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 11 Feb 2005 13:16:20 +0000

so the quote “paid a fee to download music or MP3 files off of the Internet.” exposes their intent to lie.

This study uses a statistical trick of large numbers and sample size selection. it’s accurate to 3% of the population.. witch is 350 million or so at the last census..

that means a variation in response of some plus or minus 10.5 million.. they dont tell you that.. they just point to the tiny percentage point and say.. “look how many people we estimated do this!”