Comments on: Popular songs on iTunes go to $1.29 on April 7

By: Forrest

Forrest — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:07:13 +0000

haha I bet it will

By: AP

AP — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 03:22:06 +0000

This is ridiculous and just another good example of another way to push people towards downloading music illegally. Screw iTunes for making this change, it sucks!!

By: High.

High. — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 01:13:30 +0000

So many contradictions. So if artists make their money through airplay, touring and merchandising then why are you raising prices for songs reducing the amount of people who will buy and listen to the music? The cheaper the music is, the more people hear it, the more people that hear the music the higher the chance someone likes it, if someone grows to like the music enough then they go to the local shows and by stuff supporting the artist. Prices for music do not go up for the artist’s benefit, it goes up so the middlemen can continue to line their pockets from an artist’s hard work.

sidenote: If you haven’t noticed, demand has gone DOWN for OVERPRICED music in the last 5 years. Supply and demand, the digital age has limitless supply– LOL.

By: Swin

Swin — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 05:56:32 +0000

Ha. Less than 1% of artists have ever gotten rich off making music. And even fewer got rich of record sales. The biggies make it off radio airplay (publishing), touring and merchandising.

By: J.C.

J.C. — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:32:21 +0000

You’re absolutely right. But I’m afraid the music industry is fighting a losing battle. Your business model is changing and there’s nothing you can do about it.

I remember someone once saying the era of musicians getting rich off their music is ending. Perhaps this is true. I suppose they’ll become more like painters and sculptors who do it but none of them get rich from it.

By: recorders

recorders — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:38:59 +0000

6 months in, it will be interesting to take a look back and see what the statistics look like…..if there is a significant drop in sales @ 1.29.

By: Andy Roberts

Andy Roberts — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:44:26 +0000

So what will the price increase do to the cost of an album?

To buy Taylor Swift’s album on iTunes in the UK costs £7.99. To get the CD version delivered from Amazon (and there are cheaper online retailers than Amazon) costs £8.98. That’s only a 99 pence difference between the two and that’s before any price increase gets factored in.

It seems ridiculous that a low quality MP3 with no physical distribution costs can cost nearly the same as the CD version.

By: Swin

Swin — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:19:21 +0000

thus your ignorance

By: Stephanie DeLuca

Stephanie DeLuca — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:48:30 +0000

I think that’s absolutely ridiculous. It’s like charging extra for a train ticket when it’s on peak (I live in New York so I take the Long Island Railroad). Since so many people are going to the city early in the morning and going back to Long Island at night there are certain hours where they charge extra just because there are more people going on the train during that time frame. Since some songs are more popular than others they think they could charge extra just because more people like the song. I hate how all the prices of everything are going up and there are already 5.5 million people who got laid off from work.

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 09:36:25 +0000

TL;DR

By: lokomotor

lokomotor — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 07:08:36 +0000

Just check the song-writing credits in the CD liner notes.

Taylor Swift wrote all her songs. She’s the real deal.

Do you think professional song-writers would give up their song-writing royalties just to make an artist look good?

By: apples to introduce variable pricing on itunes « Raja Jasti’s Blog - Renaissance Thinking

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:31:10 +0000

[...] Times reports that apple will start charging $1.29 per song for some of the songs. The world’s largest music store, Apple’s iTunes, [...]

By: Swin

Swin — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:28:37 +0000

You know, this story and the comments are completely written out of ignorance of the business. The fact that so many of you endorse the act of “stealing” is just wrong.

I’m an artist manager and while I’m in battle with labels many days, they have a right to charge whatever the hell they want for their products. It’s based on basic supply and demand. If people demand the product and are willing to pay the price, then they will pay it. If they aren’t then they don’t have to.

Why shouldn’t every Coke I buy be just $0.49 instead of $0.79 or $1.29 or $1.49. Aren’t convenience stores, fast food restaurants and everyone else just greedy and ripping me off.

Why shouldn’t all software (OS X included) be just $9.99. Look, I’m a huge Apple fan, typing on a Mac right now, but while the government is busy getting involved in business, what would good old Steve Jobs think if they stepped in and said “you know Steve, you sure seem to be making a lot of margin on these here ipods and such. We’re going to take control of your distribution channel and for you to sell them for $99.99. We know you’ll make a lot less money, but the PEOPLE will love it and you won’t be viewed as such a F#&%”.

Does that make any sense? What other distribution channel in this country – hell in the world has a flat price imposed on it. Gas? Cable? Software? Movie Rentals? iPhone Apps? Cold Drinks? Any other consumables?

The issue is that you all think music should somehow be free because you hear it all around you and you want it. Water is all around you too – but you freakin’ pay $1.49 for a bottle of it. FOR A FREAKIN’ BOTTLE OF WATER. Who is greedy with that?

You are NOT entitled to free music. These record companies do NOT owe you anything. They take risk like all other companies, and deserve their reward when they can get it. In this digital age you can preview almost any piece of music out there, so there is far less “buyer beware” than there was with cassettes, LPs and CDs. You can actually hear it before you buy it.

Throw down the sticks and torches against the music industry. YOU ARE WRONG.

By: Haas

Haas — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 04:20:45 +0000

Buy music, and pay more for music that sucks? Another reason I turn on Pandora.

By: Zuzz

Zuzz — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 01:56:28 +0000

So April 7 is the new download like a pirate day you say?

By: Canciones mas populares subirán a USD1.29 en iTunes — superfinanciera.com

Canciones mas populares subirán a USD1.29 en iTunes — superfinanciera.com — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 01:19:09 +0000

[...] de precios bajo el cual las canciones mas populares costarán USD1.29 en vez de 99 centavos. [crunchgear] Comparta esta nota [...]

By: Jason

Jason — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 00:46:05 +0000

I buy music from Amazon anyway.

By: flannel

flannel — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 23:54:04 +0000

I’ll stick with my Zune Pass thank you!

By: ONLINE SERVICES/INTERACTIVE MEDIA « Daily Marauder

ONLINE SERVICES/INTERACTIVE MEDIA « Daily Marauder — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 23:45:47 +0000

[...] what Cupertino is telling record labels. Remember: prices now top out at $1.29 for popular songs. (http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/03/26/popular-songs-on-itunes-go-to-129-on-april-7 [...]

By: JasonfromEPIC

JasonfromEPIC — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 23:35:45 +0000

How many times do I have to politely email you to point out the huge errors in your stories on music before you stop letting your writers just post whatever they want?