Arms supplier in device wars
p2p news / p2pnet:- “We are the arms supplier in the device wars between Samsung, Sony, Apple, and others.”
So said Warner Music Group boss Edgar Bronfman jr in reponse to Apple ceo Steve Jobs’ attack on the record label cartel for wanting to boost their already outrageous wholesale rates for mp3s.
“To have only one price point is not fair to our artists, and I dare say not appropriate to consumers,” he went on. “The market should decide, not a single retailer. Some songs should be $0.99 and some songs should be more. I don’t want to give anyone the impression that $0.99 is a thing of the past.”
Quoted by Red Herring, he was at an investors’ conference in New York where he told his audience, “Not all songs are created equal – not all time periods are created equal. We want, and will insist upon having, variable pricing.”
iTunes is to all intents and purposes the only half-way successful corporate big music ’service’ and Bronfman’s observations can only mean the gallant iTunes supporters who are already paying $1 and up, depending on where they are, per download, can expect to soon be ripped off for even more.
Downloads currently wholesale for between 65 to 80 cents, but the Big Four record label cartel, of whom Warner is a member, want them to go for as much as $1.50 each.
“The labels are greedy,” said Jobs, who’s, “become the Wal-Mart of the Internet” and who “wants to retain that monopoly”.
“Instead of spending $15 for a CD, you buy two cuts for two bucks,” Red Herring has Joe Nordgaard, managing director of a strategic consulting firm saying. “The traditional model with premium pricing has been so lucrative for the music industry. When they cut the deal with Apple, they did not realize what they had done. Now they want out.”
But, “We have to keep thinking how we are going to monetize our product for our shareholders,” said Bronfman, who also made it clear he’s after the satellite radio industry as well.
“It’s now time for satellite radio to pay,” the story has him saying.
“We gave them a seven-year license at vastly below-market rate to allow that business model to occur. There is no reason for their content cost to be one-tenth of what everyone else is paying and have this done on the backs of the music industry while they pay market rate to the NFL, Howard Stern, and Major League Baseball.”
Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win
- Mohandas Gandhi
See:-
Red Herring – Bronfman Fires Back at Apple, September 23, 2005
Wal-Mart of the Internet – Jobs sticks up for music lovers, September 22, 2005
September 26th, 2005 at 5:36 pm
I havn’t purchased a single piece of your crap in almost 3 years!
You betchyer pricing isn’t appropriate. It’s still too high. The phrase “monetize out product” pretty much says everything that needs to be said, doesn’t it?
September 26th, 2005 at 7:35 pm
I simply can not believe that this nut is going to stand there and make statements like, “We have to keep thinking how we are going to monetize our product for our shareholders,”. Where is all this concern for the shareholders when it comes to CEO bonuses? Basically CEO bonuses happen whether the CEO preforms or doesn’t preform. There is no withdrawal of the bonus for lack of preformance. If the CEO is released ahead of the contractual obligations, why are those bonuses still made even though the CEO won’t be there to do his job? You call that shareholder protection? I sure won’t want you gaurding my hen house.
So it took what, 2 years to come up with a good sounding reason to increase prices that “maybe” the buying public would support? It was muttered a couple of years ago that the cartel wanted to raise prices and Jobs was fussing then over it. So they have finally put their collective heads together over at the cartels and came up with this silly sounding reason? lol. How long you think they gonna be satisfied with this price range if the customer swallows it and shruggs about the price increase?
What the real problem is here is nothing but greed. In the “what have you done for me lately” corporate world, showing profit on a day to day basis is job justification to keep your seat in the employed ranks.
One has to ask just why they feel this manufactured and current music is worth any more than those of past artists that were actually musicians. Preformance on stage has a whole different meaning today when dealing with concerts. One doesn’t so much need to spend years learning to play an instrument, they need to look good for the camera, dress in skimpy and sexy outfits, and be able to do a dance routine with lip-syncing. Something about all this makes me ask “Will the real musican please stand up”. I sure fail to see them on the current stages.
September 26th, 2005 at 10:12 pm
Does anyone remember Edgar Jr’s self-arranged kidnapping adventure back in the 1970s to get some money out of Daddy? Nice to see he’s made something of himself.
September 27th, 2005 at 8:43 am
Ed, listen up. Noone cares. We don’t give a damn about your “need” to monetize your crap so your damned shareholder-parasites can get another cent per share in their dividend this year ok? We are sick to death of being gouged for money every time we turn around. Shut up, and go away.
September 27th, 2005 at 10:51 pm
“We gave them a seven-year license at vastly below-market rate to allow that business model to occur. There is no reason for their content cost to be one-tenth of what everyone else is paying and have this done on the backs of the music industry while they pay market rate to the NFL, Howard Stern, and Major League Baseball
In other words, we may help out our buddies at the time (illigal price control) then when we decide we want more, we will either ask you, sue you, or both.