iTunes sales "collapsing"

[Dinner]

I don't know anyone willing to pay for a DRMed song. The price is far to high and the bastards try to tell me what to do with the song I just bought and how to do it. Screw that and screw them.

[Dinner]

BTW there is a market for downloaded digital media. The free download programs often spread viruses, misnamed software, or just crappy copies so I can see people paying a small amount to get excellent copies of exactly what they want. The problem is Apple and the RIAA have been a greedy SOBs who want to charge MORE then the cost of a CD to get a digital copy of music which can't be played on more then one machine ever. **** that.

The price has to be so low that people will actually be willing to pay it instead of downloading it for free. We're talking something like $0.01-$0.10 per song or maybe a flat rate of $5 per week to download all the music you want. If it is any more expensive then people will just download for free and give Apple/RIAA the finger.

Oh, yeah. They also absolutely must stop the arrogance of trying to force people to buy multiple copies and trying to tell people how they can use music they've already bought. That just pisses people off so they download the free stuff and refuse to pay.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Verto


Agreed. And given the huge amount of crap being released...

That nothing but me too crap is released is a function of how consolidated the recording industry has become. In the old days even if you didn't fit the cookie cutter "in thing" mold then you could likely still find a label to carry your record. Now days you have 5-7 companies which control something like 90% of the sales and retail space.

It really is the rise of virtual retailers like Amazon.com which have allowed the recent boom in Indie labels. Before it was extremely hard to get a distributor to carry records from an Indie label especially since the big names had already signed contracts with retailers giving them a right to X amount of floor space at all times. Amazon and the other websites could carry EVERYTHING including the Indie labels and it was cheap since all they have is warehouses and no store fronts. The internet may yet save good music from the attack of generic corporate crap.

[SpencerH]

I think the subscription model with reasonably priced downloads (for ownership of specific songs) is the wave of the future.

[Ming]

Originally posted by SpencerH
I think the subscription model with reasonably priced downloads (for ownership of specific songs) is the wave of the future.

I would agree... However, the record companies are greedy. They don't realize they can probably make more money in the long run doing it that way. Most people would be willing to pay a reasonable annual or monthly fee to download all they want. In a way, that would also limit the piracy. If people knew they could get everything they wanted, virus free, and good copies, all for a reasonable fee, many would do so.

[Kuciwalker]

The subscription model is absolutely terrible, IMO. I refuse to buy music that will be held hostage unless I pay again every month.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
The subscription model is absolutely terrible, IMO. I refuse to buy music that will be held hostage unless I pay again every month.

That's not the kind of model I'm talking about. I'm talking about "pay a regular fee" and get what you want, and retain the rights to use the music in any non commercial way you want.

[Wiglaf]

Ruckus is a good media player. Free if you have a college email account that they accept. Unlimited downloads, but you can only listen on the computer un less you have a compatible player.

Ming:

[Ming]

And then again, I guess it all depends on what numbers you are looking at

comScore: iTunes Sales Surge 84%
by Mark Walsh, Friday, Dec 15, 2006 6:00 AM ET
CHALK UP MORE RESEARCH SHOWING strong sales growth at iTunes. comScore Networks Thursday reported that sales at Apple's digital music store year-over-year have grown 84% during the first nine months of this year.


The comScore data comes the same week that Forrester Research ignited a controversy with a report stating that iTunes sales had fallen 65% the first six months of the year.

Apple fired back with a statement denying that sales had slowed, and claiming that iTunes accounts for nearly 6% of all the music sold in the United States, making Apple the fourth-largest music-retailer. Piper Jaffray chimed in with its own research Tuesday, indicating that the number of songs sold per week on iTunes had grown 78% during the first nine months of 2006 compared to the year-earlier period.

In addition to reporting that sales had nearly doubled, comScore also found that the number of unique visitors to the iTunes site reached 20.8 million last month--an 85% increase from last year.

"As Mark Twain might have said, the rumors of iTunes' death have been greatly exaggerated," said Gian Fulgoni, chairman of comScore Networks, in a prepared statement. comScore bases its iTunes sales estimate on its panel of 1.5 million U.S. consumers who allow comScore to capture their browsing and transaction behavior, including online and offline purchasing.

Separately, Nielsen SoundScan Thursday also reported that sales of individually downloaded digital tracks were up 67% for the first 49 weeks of this year compared to 2005.

In a blog post Wednesday addressing the iTunes contretemps, Forrester analyst Josh Bernoff blamed news reports for sensationalizing the 65% drop in sales during the first half of 2006. He noted that the sample of 2,700 U.S. credit and debit card transactions on which Forrester based its estimate wasn't large enough to conclude that iTunes sales were "collapsing"--a word used in some headlines about the report.

Rather, he argued that iTunes sales are simply leveling off. "It's the music industry that has to worry, since the $1 billion a year or so from iTunes, globally, doesn't nearly make up for even the drop in CD sales in the US, which are now down $2.5 billion from where they were," he wrote.

ComScore declined to comment on its iTunes data beyond its statement. But the year-over-year figures it provided appeared to be aimed at countering any seasonal sales shifts that might have been reflected in the Forrester data. In the report, Bernoff acknowledged that with only two years of full data it was "too soon to tell if this decline was seasonal or if buyers were reaching their saturation level for digital music."

[Lorizael]

Sure, Ming. Just like the Democratic Party didn't meet with Hamas. You can cover it up, but we'll always know the truth.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Ming


That's not the kind of model I'm talking about. I'm talking about "pay a regular fee" and get what you want, and retain the rights to use the music in any non commercial way you want.

You think that would ever happen? And I'm skeptical that this would be to the majors' advantage. Pay 60$ a year to download everything you want, DRM-free? No way.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Lorizael
Sure, Ming. Just like the Democratic Party didn't meet with Hamas. You can cover it up, but we'll always know the truth.

uhhhhhh... cover up?

My favorite line in the piece...

In a blog post Wednesday addressing the iTunes contretemps, Forrester analyst Josh Bernoff blamed news reports for sensationalizing the 65% drop in sales during the first half of 2006. He noted that the sample of 2,700 U.S. credit and debit card transactions on which Forrester based its estimate wasn't large enough to conclude that iTunes sales were "collapsing"--a word used in some headlines about the report.

Forrester is admitting their research was crap... and that the media were morons for the way they reported the story...

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Lorizael
Sure, Ming. Just like the Democratic Party didn't meet with Hamas. You can cover it up, but we'll always know the truth.

I demand an investigation.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Oerdin
BTW there is a market for downloaded digital media. The free download programs often spread viruses, misnamed software, or just crappy copies so I can see people paying a small amount to get excellent copies of exactly what they want. The problem is Apple and the RIAA have been a greedy SOBs who want to charge MORE then the cost of a CD to get a digital copy of music which can't be played on more then one machine ever. **** that.

1. Music bought on iTunes can be played on 5 computers.
2. A full CD costs $10 to download.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ming


That's not the kind of model I'm talking about. I'm talking about "pay a regular fee" and get what you want, and retain the rights to use the music in any non commercial way you want.

The problem with that is that I'm going to pay the first month's fee, download everything I want from the last 50 years and then quit the next month.