Reuters article on online music services’ bubble ignores Apple’s market-leading iTunes Music Store

“Music downloads will render the ubiquitous compact disc all but obsolete in the next five years, yet half of all companies that begin selling digital songs online will fail by year-end, a researcher warned on Saturday,” Bernhard Warner reports for Reuters.

“By 2008, one third of music sales in the United States and nearly 20% in Europe will come in the form of downloads and streaming music over the Internet, building a multi-billion dollar business for the battered music industry, according to a new study by consultancy Forrester Research,” Warner reports.

“‘The industry is going through a complete change in the way people consume music,’ Josh Bernoff, a Forrester Research analyst told a gathering of music and technology executives at the annual MidemNet conference,” Warner reports. “He said the U.S. market alone for downloads and subscriptions to online music stores will top $300 million this year from a virtual standing start a year ago. ‘By 2007 or 2008, CDs will be something only old people have,’ Bernoff said.”

Full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: An interesting story from Reuters that somehow and for some reason fails to mention the market share behemoth, Apple’s iTunes Music Store. Perhaps we’re being paranoid, but if, for example, Microsoft had the online music store commanding 70-80% of the market, do you think the article would mention that fact or ignore it completely? After all, when the bubble bursts, which store is most likely to be left standing tall? More information about the elephant in the room that Reuters has decided to try to ignore, Apple’s iTunes Music Store here.


  1. Um, notice none of the current online services were mentioned? Only Wal mart and some cable company as big companies about to launch.

    Paranoid? Or it could be that the USA Today copyeditor cut all the juicy details out so as to not promote any one given service? Some copyeditors have that blind spot. Make it bland and nobody will complain, and they stay out of the boss’s crosshairs.

    Having worked in that business for 15 years, I can tell you, copy editors love to suck the interesting parts out of stories, for fear of being accused of pandering to some business or interest, and to keep the tone of the piece subdued.

    I’m all for not pandering to advertisers. They already think the ads are more important than the content in the news hole. But historical perspective does call for naming the major players.

  2. Well, in some way, it can be said that all of the info in this articles is **news**.

    Mentioning iTMS as the industry leader certainly is nothing new nor newsworthy.

  3. The reason is that they count every crap and crany PC they sell. Buying a 499$ PC is not the same or doesn’t have the same use a Buying an iMac.

    They should compare similar machine. A PC boutht just to shut up a teenager should not count the same as an Mac bought to make a newspaper.

    You cannot compage a G5 system with a Celeron system. The G5 should have more bonus that the celeron.

    I looked at the Folding site during the weekend and OSX was having 5.38 index compare to 4.91 for windows. That is the number returned versus the machine used.

  4. Maybe it’s because its point is the download music service bubble will burst at some point in the future. But, it is unlikely that iTMS will be one of them, so mentioning iTMS does not serve the hypothesis. To write a fair and balanced article, all aspects must be taken into consideration. However, we all know that good journalism is a rarity these days. Most journalists are too lazy to do research and ignorant or too preconceived or too biased or enjoys perks given by some corporations.

  5. “He said the U.S. market alone for downloads and subscriptions to online music stores will top $300 million this year from a virtual standing start a year ago.”

    And at LEAST $100 million of that, one-third, will be from iTMS in the form of the Pepsi Promotion. Tack in the $100 million or so the site will probably do on its own (given current volume of nearly 2 million songs a week) and you’ve got about 2/3 of the expected market already going to iTMS.


  6. Reuters is supposed to be a news agency, but it does appear to have quite a problem with Apple. Sometimes it doesn’t see Apple at all, while sometimes it sees things that aren’t there.

    Three stories come to mind.

    In the UK, Reuters seemed to be the first news source to state that $100 iPods had actually been announced by Apple – many newspapers then re-hashed that story very prominently. Any experienced Apple user knows that announcements like that are never made before Steve’s keynote.

    Reuters also made a fuss about the iPod battery ‘scandal’, which had already been dismissed, but the story was soon picked up by other UK newspapers, leading to questions in the UK parliament.

    Now they are unaware if the iTMS.

    It’s strange that they get all the advance imaginary news about Apple, know all about the iPod’s battery, but know nothing of iTMS.

    Obviously they don’t have an agenda – they’re a news organisation!

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.