L3thal Veteran Posted March 1, 2005 Veteran Share Posted March 1, 2005 Some leading music labels are in talks with online retailers to raise wholesale prices for digital music downloads, in an attempt to capitalize on burgeoning demand for legal online music.The moves, which suggest that the labels want a bigger slice in the fledgling market's spoils, has angered Steve Jobs, the Apple Computer chief executive who is behind the popular iTunes online music store. But music executives expressed caution about their ability to push through unilateral price increases. Among the biggest groups, Universal Music and Sony BMG are known to be particularly reluctant to disrupt the market for downloads. One top label said it would not raise wholesale prices now because the market was not yet mature enough for a price increase. The three other music labels which also include EMI and Warner refused to comment. Analysts, meanwhile, are warning that price rises could exacerbate Internet piracy, which is thought to cost the industry about $2.4 billion a year. Music industry executives said introductory wholesale prices for digital tracks had been set low to stimulate demand for online music sales but the success of Apple's music store had prompted concern that they may now be too low. The effort suggests several labels believe demand for online music is robust enough to withstand higher prices, despite the fact that online sales are estimated to account for about 2 percent of total music sales. Source :whistle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 :laugh: Yea when "artists" actually make something called "music" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webeagle12 Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 if i see hike, I'm going underground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chadwick Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 their funeral, lets see them try it haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted March 1, 2005 Author Veteran Share Posted March 1, 2005 I was actually planning to start purchasing music online, but I guess I'll go back to good ol' IRC :shifty: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vip Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 wow, greedy bastages! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostspyder Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Yeah this only makes me want to pirate more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroChaos Veteran Posted March 1, 2005 Veteran Share Posted March 1, 2005 when are the record companies gonna realize it's not up to them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyLarry Veteran Posted March 1, 2005 Veteran Share Posted March 1, 2005 I say let them try this. The dumbass' will bury themselves an even deeper hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted March 2, 2005 Author Veteran Share Posted March 2, 2005 when are the record companies gonna realize it's not up to them? 585552958[/snapback] Never :no: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangbang023 Veteran Posted March 2, 2005 Veteran Share Posted March 2, 2005 Are you kidding me? They are going to jack up the prices on music that isn't even full quality just as they are convincing people legal is the best way to go? Why not just label this the "go broke or go to jail" campaign. Way to encourage your users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zilos Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Alwell, it'll just force people to get it for free then, no biggy! :laugh: So sad, all they see is $$$$$.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g-n-t Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Alwell, it'll just force people to get it for free then, no biggy! :laugh: So sad, all they see is $$$$$.... 585555332[/snapback] not anymore :laugh: i really dont care. after what they've been doing, i wont pay for music just out of principal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangbang023 Veteran Posted March 2, 2005 Veteran Share Posted March 2, 2005 not anymore :laugh: i really dont care. after what they've been doing, i wont pay for music just out of principal. 585555338[/snapback] I'll pay for music that isn't put out by the RIAA. When Korn's independent album is released, I'll get it first day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANova Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 I guess one Ferrari isn't enough for those executives. Good old greed, will the human race ever learn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mAcOdIn Veteran Posted March 2, 2005 Veteran Share Posted March 2, 2005 Alwell, it'll just force people to get it for free then, no biggy! :laugh: So sad, all they see is $$$$$.... 585555332[/snapback] Apparently all people who get it for free are also seeing nothing but $$$$$, else they'd put down some of thier own. IMO the answer is a compromise not a free or insane prices extreme. What makes me mad is that true high quality audio is the real loser in this whole war. You have a great format like SACD which is way superior to CD and playable on normal CD players and it gets dumped for this crappy Dual Disc format which sucks on both sides. They keep wanting us to pay more for less and less actual quality, and I'm not talking about preference here. A CD has some decent specs, yet alot of the time they just crank up the volume and drown everything out, well I can do that at home morons. Now you get Dual Disc which costs the same or more, can't hold as much normal CD side, and usually has a crappy lossy Dolby Digital Track on the other side. Yay, way to go RIAA. DVD-Audio and SACD in the meantime just get ****ed on for this ****** format, and in the meantime we're all fighting over what to pay for a crappy 128kbps song. In 10 years we'll be fighting over who can pay the most for a 56kbps Real Audio 2 file because we can fit the most of that crappy format onto or 50 TB hard drives and wonder why the quality sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallas Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 i thought in a capitalistic economy, the consumers set the prices, with suply and demand. or something like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangbang023 Veteran Posted March 2, 2005 Veteran Share Posted March 2, 2005 Apparently all people who get it for free are also seeing nothing but $$$$$, else they'd put down some of thier own.IMO the answer is a compromise not a free or insane prices extreme. What makes me mad is that true high quality audio is the real loser in this whole war. You have a great format like SACD which is way superior to CD and playable on normal CD players and it gets dumped for this crappy Dual Disc format which sucks on both sides. They keep wanting us to pay more for less and less actual quality, and I'm not talking about preference here. A CD has some decent specs, yet alot of the time they just crank up the volume and drown everything out, well I can do that at home morons. Now you get Dual Disc which costs the same or more, can't hold as much normal CD side, and usually has a crappy lossy Dolby Digital Track on the other side. Yay, way to go RIAA. DVD-Audio and SACD in the meantime just get ****ed on for this ****** format, and in the meantime we're all fighting over what to pay for a crappy 128kbps song. In 10 years we'll be fighting over who can pay the most for a 56kbps Real Audio 2 file because we can fit the most of that crappy format onto or 50 TB hard drives and wonder why the quality sucks. 585555379[/snapback] It's pretty simple......those formats cost more to manufacture and they know that their main target demographic (12 - 18 year olds) don't care about sound quality and can barely tell the difference between a $20 boombox and a THX certified system playing the latest DVD-Audio disc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylejn Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 If the prices are increased, then I'm going back to pirating. No question about it. At the moment, I download songs off of file sharing networks that aren't commercially available here in the States. However, if a song is available on iTunes, then I'll purchase it there because the price is reasonable to me. If the RIAA wants to bump up the prices, then by all means, go ahead. It'll start saving me money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal2002 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 ^ ...your just giving them reasons to keep jacking the price up. Instead of piraing, why not buy CDs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted March 2, 2005 Author Veteran Share Posted March 2, 2005 ^ ...your just giving them reasons to keep jacking the price up. Instead of piraing, why not buy CDs? 585555449[/snapback] Actually, he's giving them reasons to jack it up by purchasing the music. As the article says, the executives want to take advantage while music downloading is booming to gain more money. So if half a million people didn't download music, the prices would've remained the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mAcOdIn Veteran Posted March 2, 2005 Veteran Share Posted March 2, 2005 Oh it makes perfect business sense it's just stupid and it's making me mad I'm being dragged down to thier level of quality, and it makes me madder knowing there really isn't jack I can do about it, since thier mom and dads spending power far outweighs my own. The whole situation is absurd. It costs more to make a cassette than it does a CD yet a CD cost more, now it takes even less to supply a 128kbps AAc or WMA file yet they want it to cost the same or more as a CD? It's pretty freaking sad when people resort to buying records as the "audiophile" choice because the industry just keeps crippling all the newer technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal2002 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Actually, he's giving them reasons to jack it up by purchasing the music. As the article says, the executives want to take advantage while music downloading is booming to gain more money. So if half a million people didn't download music, the prices would've remained the same. 585555470[/snapback] Kind of, more like if that half a million didn't download music they would have just said they are not making enough off the venture and jacked up the prices still. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted March 2, 2005 Author Veteran Share Posted March 2, 2005 Kind of, more like if that half a million didn't download music they would have just said they are not making enough off the venture and jacked up the prices still. ;) 585555516[/snapback] So its still a lose-lose situation for consumers :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hidea Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Burn in hell!!! Screw that, I ain't paying a cent more! Greedy ******s! :@ :@ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts