Brilliant as usual J. Nice one.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34300-2004Mar29.html

Paying more for a hot single makes perfect sense. $2.49 for a huge single? It’s not so much. And since people always complain that they only want an album for the single, there will be a demand for the hit single. Remember, ringtones cost around $2.49. The same for an entire song (a current hit single) makes perfect sense.

Jason, what the industry does not want to do, obviously, is lose control of digital distribution to outside parties such as Apple. The industry’s strength is its distribution. Before it gives up control of its distribution in a digital world, it needs to make damn well sure the model is going to work. Every day I read tech-geeks and licensing experts who have the perfect advice for the music industry: work with P2P, issue blanket licenses, do this, do that. But it’s not as simple as you’d like it to be. It’s a terribly convoluted and complicated issue, and at stake is an entire industry. And unlike the steel, rail or airline industries, the music industry won’t bet bailed out if a grand experiment doesn’t work.

Let’s talk about the costs associated with digital music. You’re right. There are no distribution costs or shipping costs. Sales costs are lower (but not nonexistant). Marketing expenses, though, rise in a digital world. And though there is no cost to manufacture the product, that never was a big expense to begin with. How much does it cost to get a person to buy a CD? More than you think. People buy what they hear on the radio, see on TV and read about in the press. All that costs a lot of money. So stop the bullshit assertion that digital music is some kind of low-cost product. It all comes from the same master tapes, no matter the quality of the end product. Then you’ve got to figure in Apple’s cut. If they’re taking 30%, that’s about as much as distribution costs and shipping and manufacturing. I consider Appple to be more of a distributor than a retailer, because of the volume of its business. If Apple is taking 30% its taking a larger percentage than any distributor in the country.

Further, when did trying to make money and spare the jobs of its employees become such a sin for a corporation? If the industry takes your advice, Jason, there is a possibility the health of the industry could be seriously hurt. Now I’m sure a lot of people will say they don’t care, but we’re talking about American jobs and an American industry, the livelihoods of employees and artists across the country.

Nobody is sabotaging online music by raising prices. You’re misinformed and lack the proper perspective to comment on this topic. In this comments section I was once rudely told by a member of the 1115 crew to stick to music commentary because my politcal comments were thought to be less than insightful. Now I say the same to you. I urge you to stop commenting on topics such as the music industry. You don’t have a proper grasp of the issues. What you wrote is the same old partisan bitching that fills blogs left and right. No insight. No perspective.

Final point: If you think $13.99 is too much to pay at iTunes, don’t buy that album. Hundreds of titles come out every Tuesday. The world of music is full of low-cost alternatives. Nobody is putting a gun to your head and making you buy one of the few (13 out of 200, according to one article) higher-priced albums at iTunes.

We’re not communists nor anarchists, and we (more than most who share our political views) firmly believe in private industry’s right to try to earn a profit.

The music industry conspired to rig prices. They did this for years and even with the settlement they had to pay (a CD per person and some legal bills) they made out like literal bandits.

CD production (after recouping R+D costs) was much less than earlier methods, yet prices kept going up and up. The public was sold a bill of goods (including sound quality issues which aren’t germane here) on CDs, and now it is going to the next level.

Paying $2.49 for a hit single is a joke. But to that I say go for it. The market will treat that price point very harshly.

Ring tones? Please.

>And unlike the steel, rail or airline industries, the music >industry won’t bet bailed out if a grand experiment doesn’t >work.

Damned non-essential industries. The record industry deserves at least in part to fail. Monopolistic practices and poor product quality alone show this.

>So stop the bullshit assertion that digital music is some kind of >low-cost product.

It is a relatively low cost product. Any assertion otherwise is disingenuous. Subtract production, shipping and warehousing costs, and the savings are not insignificant.

>If Apple is taking 30% its taking a larger percentage than any >distributor in the country.

Apple built their own store from scratch. It may even save the industry in spite of itself. And just because you choose to see them as a distributor, doesn’t make it so.

>Further, when did trying to make money and spare the jobs of >its employees become such a sin for a corporation?

Are you serious? You know better than anyone that they are cutting jobs left and right. They are also cutting deserving talent as well.

>In this comments section I was once rudely told by a member >of the 1115 crew to stick to music commentary because my >politcal comments were thought to be less than insightful.

How long have you been waiting to use that? It was poor form for me to say that, but in that particular case you were swimming. As stated previously, Jason and I both have extensive first hand knowledge of the industry, so your comparison doesn’t hold water. Furthermore, Jason didn’t dis you, I did.

>No insight. No perspective.

You write a music blog. I read it from time to time. I have never seen what I would call a solution to this problem on your site.

Look at the film industry. The costs of movie tickets has been rising for years. While there are some complaints, most people continue to pay these prices which have risen over 100% in my movie-going lifetime. By comparison, CD/Download costs have been relatively stable. The difference is that everyone knows how much movies cost to make. They know that CGI fx, marketing budgets, and paying Ben Affleck all drive up the cost of your next blockbuster, so they know where their $10 ticket is going. On the flipside, the average consumer thinks a CD costs $1 or less to produce and the rest is profit.

I’m not sure why the music industry hasn’t taken more aggressive stance in educating consumers about this. It’s a lot easier than the petty fighting they’ve been waging over downloads.

The other price point issue not mentioned here is subsidizing. The majority of releases on major labels lose money. It’s the mult-platinum albums that make up for them. That’s why they’re trying to squeeze every bit of juice out of the few hits that are out there.

so, i should put a small business owner out of business so some 25 year old with a marketing degree can get a $50,000 salary for coming up with slogans like “download legally. drink pepsi.”?

http://www.downhillbattle.org/itunes/

though blogs are, as you say, becoming more left-right oriented (much like the economy…hmmm…), so are recording artist. everytime the madonnas take it upon themselves to ask us “what the fuck do you think you’re doing?” when we try to download their files, another releases them for free, knowing that it WILL, in turn, increase their music sales (see link in previous post).

luckily, both polar ends of the industry are entitled (er, their label is, anyway) to release their property as they see fit. i say, more power to them. you don’t want me to hear your shit before i gladly shell out a jackson to support art? fine. but just remember who paid for your fucking hum-v.

The music industry I think, more than anything else, suffers from reshuffling of personnel from one label to another and by this, nothing ever changes. They recycle label heads more than the NFL recycles Marty Schottenheimer. The business model has not changed much since the advent of the interweb. They would rather sell 2 cd’s at $12.99 than 4 cd’s at $10.99.

As J’s example points out, online music stores were supposed to provide a cheaper alternative to buying CD’s, not necessarily replace buying CD’s altogether. But again, shortsightedness by the labels makes them greedy (as J points out). Rather than grabbing some internet users and their sales in addition to their CD sales, they would rather jack up the price and lose them and view them as a lost cause or lost revenue stream. Isn’t it better to sell SOME MP3′s rather than none?

I don’t understand how the labels are losing control of distribution to Apple. If they didn’t like Apple’s terms, they simply wouldn’t offer their artists material on the site. It’s that simple. Now look at how the industry constantly bows down to Wal Mart and other major retailers. Who exactly has the control?

The iTMS store works, you can’t argue that. It’s effectiveness, however, we can debate. But I think if it was a lost cause, there wouldn’t be so many other companies trying to get into the marketplace.

I think if some people knew how much some albums cost to make, they would be doubled over laughing.

But then again, most of the music I listen to is produced in home studios or on the cheap in jamaica 1975-1982, and the biggest expense in both cases is the pounds of weed smoked during the production.

you talk about the music industry’s lack of education about the costs of their product. theres a good reason for that. if people knew how much bullshit musicians got put through to make very little money for themselves while the people who “create” them get paid through the nose, no one would buy another major label CD ever again. i know steve albini has a good diatribe posted online about exactly this. its a racket all around, the consumers dont win, the artists dont win (except in those rare contracts like mariah, rem, etc sign for big money once theyre already insanely established), only the labels were winning. now theyre losing and theyre whining about it. fuck em all is what i say. theyre the real pirates.

exactly. alot of the best music ever had no A+R behind it, no advertising budget, no studio costs above what the guys own in their bedrooms. only shit artists need hundreds of thousands of dollars to write an album.