Greedy Big Five music labels looking to jack up iTunes songs to $2.49 each?

“iTunes has been hailed as the first successful online music store, with over 50 million songs downloaded. Its success has been due largely to Apple’s powerful name, the iPod, flexible use of the tracks, and the 99 cent-price per song or $9.99 for an album. More than that, it has been celebrated as a sign of things to come for an industry still in its infancy,” Matt Buchanan writes for The Washington Square News.

“Despite iTunes’ success and the growing success of other services, the record industry still isn’t happy; it thinks that 99 cents a song is too cheap, and the five major labels (Universal Music Group, EMI, BMG, Sony and Warner Music) are discussing a price hike ranging from $1.25 to an eye-gouging $2.49 per song,” Buchanan writes. “At that price, downloading music will become far more expensive than buying CDs, which would practically destroy the online music market.”

Buchanan writes, “This is counter to everything the record companies should be doing. If anything, they should be cutting prices to make it more attractive to download music legally. Instead, this move will push online music junkies back into the world of file sharing. After all, who wants to pay more for less?”

Full article here.


  1. I have been following this one for about two weeks now. It is just sad how greedy those record companies are.

    Is it me, or is it coincidental that this is happening around the same time Sony is preparing to launch their “iPod/iTMS Killer”? Makes me go, “Hmmmm?”

  2. This might propel a lot of groups and individual singers to start disassociating themselves from the big 5 (they don’t deserve any capital letters). There is no way in Hades that I will buy anything online for even $1.25. This sounds like the big 5 could also get into legal trouble; no one has bothered yet because .99 isn’t TOO bad, but setting the price collectively at 2.49 sounds like the feds might get involved. I wonder what Bush and Kerry would have to say about this!?

  3. what a bunch of idiots! i hope steve stomps on their heads with some sense. i was a former limewire user until itunes/pepsi, now i’m thinking of returning to file sharing cause that’s just way to much.

    maybe ppl should complain about the “big 5” like ppl complain about gas prices from OPEC!!!

  4. I also hear that (although i’m not sure how new or old this is) the RIAA is working to have a tax on cd-rs or something. Completely unreasonable, eh? I mean, most of us probably don’t even use cd-rs for music..

  5. I have gone completely legit as far as obtaining music is concerned. But should there be a price hike, I will tell the RIAA to fuck off and resume my old file sharing ways.

    Don’t be stupid boys. I want to give you my money. Don’t force me to do otherwise.

  6. this is about killing the purchase of music and wanting us to rent it. recurring revenue folks, is what they want. they are on the verge of losing control of the production and distribution of music, their only function really and when that ends, then they lose their income.

  7. Last year it was the poor struggling RIAA companies, about to turn out the lights due to illegal downloading. This year the greedy b*stards want to kill the goose that laid the Golden Egg. Apple should offer artists that control their intellectual property a deal bypassing the RIAA members. The old business model is dead and they are desperately trying to hold on to their Lear Jets.

  8. at $2.49 a song, I would have bought 0 of any


    I hope they are listening, damn shame, the iTunes music store is a hit, that is where I will buy my music…ever again

Reader Feedback

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