AOL Buys MusicNow from Circuit City

Advertisement (Why?)

AOL said on Thursday it bought Circuit City Stores Inc.'s digital music subscription service MusicNow LLC, a move that thrusts Time Warner Inc.'s Internet unit into competition with RealNetworks, Yahoo, Napster and other subscription services.

Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed, but a source familiar with the matter said AOL paid less than $25 million. MusicNow will offer downloads at 99 cents each, comparable to iTunes, and it will offer monthly subscriptions for $9.95 for unlimited downloads or streaming, which refers to listening to music online without downloading it.For an additional $5 a month, listeners can download songs to a compatible digital music player.

RealNetworks Inc's Rhapsody subscription service is $9.99 a month. Napster sells its service for $9.99 a month. Yahoo's service is $6.99 a month, or $4.99 a month if one buys a 12-month subscription. Last month, CNET reported that Yahoo was raising its price to $11.99 a month for users who want to download music to digital music players.

AOL currently has a partnership with Apple Computer Inc.'s iTunes, by far the largest online music service. But that partnership is aimed at members of AOL's Internet service.

View: Neowin Forum Discussion

News source: Reuters

Dupe Article

#1 Smigit on 07 Nov 2005 - 07:38

thats pretty terrible IMO that you have to pay a premium to transfer the songs to a DAP. I mean they are still cheap and all, but I dont see how it cost them any more to protect the files and allow them to be played on a DAP. Just them grabbing more revenue where they can (yeah yeah business is business...but it sucks anyway).

(1 reply) #2 triad_man on 07 Nov 2005 - 08:08

They are a little late to the game. What could they offer customers that the others cannot? I don't see them aiming this at their core dial-up user subscriber base.

#2.1 Smigit on 07 Nov 2005 - 08:32

If I was AOL I would consider making a new premium account option that for say $7 more than their other accounts included this service. By reducing the cost you may get casual people who want music to sign up to AOL as an ISP or AOL members to switch to their store.

Currently no, doesnt seem to be alot there to differentiate them from other stores.

(1 reply) #3 Airlink on 07 Nov 2005 - 08:23

<<trolling removed>>

Last edited by 1798 on 07 Nov 2005 - 22:04

#3.1 Airlink on 08 Nov 2005 - 04:20

Warning: Do not badmouth AOL or BangBang will censor you.

(2 replies) #4 beatlesdb on 07 Nov 2005 - 10:55

Ha anyone used the above services? what is the quality of the files like?

#4.1 jadkins555 on 07 Nov 2005 - 18:38

I use it for streaming. It is great how you can simply load up the page in Internet Explorer and have instant access to your library. I haven't tried downloading anything yet, and I probably won't. Streaming is just so simple and quick.

#4.2 beatlesdb on 07 Nov 2005 - 22:02

Thanks the info, I generally use my radio for that and it's free, but if I have to pay for music, I would like to be able to have a copy I can keep. I know that iTunes are quite open at the fact that the sound quality is not very good, it works Ok on an Ipod with headphones, but that is about all

I just would like to see a service that offer a high or low quality download option. Most people don't seem to care too much about the quality but I do. The artists and recording studios work hard to have a polished high quality music - the producers in the US are renown for this. But what's the point if most people don't get to hear the full quality of the song.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Neowin.net