MUSIC INDUSTRY.

They want all the respect, protection, and value that works of art are accorded, but turn around and market and sell music as a commodity.

1. The original painting sells for $10,000. Sort of like hiring a “top 40 band” to do a private concert for one.
2. The 500 numbered, signed prints of the painting sell for $500 each. That would be like a recording of that private show that only 500 copies were made of, signed by the artist.
3. The unlimited run posters of the painting sell for $4 each. Pretty much like buying a typical compact disc.
4. Looking at an image of the painting on the web. Basically free, like listening to streaming music.

Digital music downloads fall somewhere between #3 & #4, closer to #4 in my mind, and should be priced accordingly.

They want to have their cake and eat it too. Everyone knows that is not possible, except for the music industry, evidently…

Larger files like Movies and Software are where the money is to made and advertising supported downloads can also make for more than a 99c song so thier is potential to generate revenue but music makes pennies even @ 99c

The labels want to adjust thier wholesale pricing becuse most of thier marketing costs are in the Head end but most of thier content is at the tail therfore they can hopefully offer lower prices under 99c .

I can see this as being good becuse people will be able to show the labels what they think is a fair price for content if they can buy under 99c like 79c or even 49c for older content and make that content popular the industry might rethink thier pricing strategy totally .

This price gouging is already at unbelievable levels. I mean, I can’t not believe that they actually want a dollar for a digital downloan.

Everytime I hear this 99¢ crap I also think, “You want what?” I mean really, the prices are already at physical cd prices per song. You’re not getting anything put in your hand that is really yours. No series of middlemen did anything to see that this product arrived for your shopping pleasure. In all the time that I have ever gone to stores to buy things, this has to be one of the first times I have ever seen where “less is worth more” has ever been driven to such extremes.

The funny thing is that the cartels can actually say buying it this way is legal. (Even more amazing they do it with a straight face and no mask and gun outfit.) I don’t want these downloaned, crippled, inferior, non-tangible products at the prices they are charging now. Simply in my book their worth come no where near the value charged.

And they want to find an excuse to raise prices? *walks off howling with laughter”.

I’m all in favour of variable pricing. Let’s have $0.50 per song for first run hits, with high demand, for 3 months and $0.10 per song ever after.

There is more older/obscure music that is unavailible at most record stores becuse they only stock the the top 1000 or some discount back catalog content provided by the record labels .How many record stores have a promotional stand where you can buy a back catalog CD for $7 or maybe less .So even the bricks and mortar record stores and the lables see the value in varible pricing its just Mr Jobs that wants to artificaliy inflate the price of all digital music not taking into consideration it poularity or age .

Record stores also have sale or return agreements with the Labels so if an album is not selling within a specifed time they can return thier inventory then these CD get stored in wharehouses or maybe even destroyed and the content goes into back catalog status.

More on why digital music downloads need to follow the Long Tail in this post from Chris Anderson the Editor in Chief of Wired Magazine .

http://www.thelongtail.com/the_long_tail/2005/08/could_the_label.html