Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
i knew it! i was sure it couldn't be Apple's fault. Steve Jobs is my best friend. Micro$$$$oft suck!
HOT STEAMING FRESH TURD NOW 1/2 PRICE!!
it sounds like gaaaaaaash.
they take a 30% cut of the profits and then say its the record companies faults for not selling them cheaply!
so it could be worse..
they make their money on the iPods.
Now I'm no genius, but I can do maths and I can be fairly fucking sure they make a lot of money from selling a lot of 0s and 1s.
cut from every song
£7.99 for an album is pretty good, no? And it's right to get the whole album cheaper than the collection of songs? i know it's easy to hold a record in your hands and think "the packaging costs this much, the pressing costs this much" but that's nowhere near the price of making and promoting the album. it's hard enough for almost every band and label releasing albums to survive.
so apple take 30% of the retail price and that puts them in a league with satan. does that mean our beloved indie stores are as bad for taking nearer 50%? and hmv and amazon and everyone else?
Not only do you not get a physical product and that will always be worth more than a download alone.......
1) 128 bps = Terrible sound quality
of downloading a whole album off itunes. One track as a sample maybe or a one off. You can buy albums on Play.com for that amount and you get to have it on the shelf forever.
buy CD, or better still buy vinyl. vinyl sounds brilliant and will still sound brilliant in 30 years if you look after it. i think the pricing for downloads is fine, and trying to force it down will hurt the indie bands, labels, and record shops more than anyone else.
100% legal DRM free downloads (192 bps rather than 128 bps) for approximately 22p per download, does it?
Admittedly, they only deal with independents, but, the fact remains iTunes have got their pricing structure wrong.
If the physical album cost 7.99 an iTunes version of the same can't be worth more than 4.99 at best.
if you saw how tiny an amount a label gets per track sold on emusic you wouldn't believe it. we really are talking a few pennies here. it's a waste of time. if they don't get a hell of a lot more subscribers soon, they won't exist, so there's no point in even discussing them.
normal distributor price for a new CD is nearly £7.99 - if you order a CD for that price from play and they actually deliver it, they've bought it at a midprice rate and so it should be that price. supermarkets are happy to lose money on new albums to get people in to buy food, which is why the indie stores are fucked. play are on borrowed time - they don't actually stock that many independent releases anyway, and when the channel islands tax loophole goes, so do play.
Can we discuss them please?
so, emusic have already devalued downloads, going for bigger quantities of sales and charging less / paying the label less. unfortunately, for most good music, there's a very limited potential market in the first place, and once the customer gets used to paying a stupid token amount for a track, any company that charges more is naturally just out to rip the customer off. honestly, everyone seems to be doing absolutely everything they can, including the punters, to make sure all we have left to listen to is x-factor shit. support your favourite bands, support the shops that are prepared to stock your favourite bands - if you download something for free that you are going to listen to more than a couple of times, go buy it! buy it on emusic if you like, but realise that you are getting a bargain there for a price that probably isn't sustainable.
iTunes should either offer DRM downloads at 192kbps (or higher) at a slightly lower price than the CD or they ought to cut the price drastically in order to reflect the inferior 'product' that they offer.
An iTunes album download in no way equates to the physical variant at present, so why continue to charge the same?
..at present they seem to be going for the 'Network Rail' model whereby the customer is charged more than they should be for something that isn't as good as it should be.
they already charge a LOT less than the physical product - almost half the price. god, i sound like i work for the bloody company...
why not go the whole way and demand WAV files? to provide higher quality files costs a lot more because they get so big, so the price would either have to go up, or the percentage the supplier gets back goes down. so you either piss off the customer (again) or kill the supplier. it's still a new format - it's going to take a while to settle into a reasonable cost / quality that everyone can live with.
£7.99 is in no way half the price of buying a CD.
okay - but you're still looking at paying £12/£13 for a CD, right? it will be cheaper if either the label kills itself by making very little back, or if a shop takes so many they get a big discount, but generally, for the smaller bands and label who need the support more than anyone, it's around that. so £8 for the download isn't a bad deal.
if they can't squeeze the consumer, they'll squeeze the supplier. God forbid that they or their shareholders should lose out on any potential profit.
Is Steve Jobs actually Quark from DS9?
But downloaded some songs when I had free vouchers from coca cola
Let's devalue music more!!
it's already hit rock bottom