“Apple is talking with the major record labels about a subscription music service that would give customers unlimited access to songs for a monthly fee, sources told The Post,” Claire Atkinson reports for The New York Post.
“One source said the service could have tiered pricing ranging from $10 to $15, although there are issues to be ironed out, including how much music would be included in each tier and how long consumers would be able to access that content,” Atkinson reports. “One top music exec said the labels are supportive of the idea and believe it could re-energize digital music sales. While album downloads have been on the rise, single track sales were flat in the first half of 2010 compared to the previous year.”
MacDailyNews Take: Gee, wonder why?
• After music labels’ greedy track price hike from 99-cents to $1.29, U.S. digital song sales drop – April 09, 2010
• Tracks that music cartel hiked to $1.29 on Apple’s iTunes Store show chart declines – April 10, 2009
• Amazon follows Apple to $1.29 music tracks – April 08, 2009
• Hit tracks to cost $1.29 at Apple’s iTunes Store starting April 7 – March 27, 2009
Atkinson continues, “Speculation that Apple would introduce a subscription service has been kicking around for years but the news that music service Spotify will be part of Microsoft’s Windows Phone 7 release on Oct. 11 revived industry chatter.
Read more in the full article here.
I don’t want to subscribe to my music! I want to own my music. This doesn’t seem like something Apple would do. Didn’t Apple say in the beginning of the iTunes Store that people don’t want to subscribe to or rent their music?
I don’t want to subscribe to my music! I want to own my music. This doesn’t seem like something Apple would do. Didn’t Apple say in the beginning of the iTunes Store that people don’t want to subscribe to or rent their music?
Didn’t Steve say people want to buy their music, not rent? I haven’t downloaded more than a few songs since the price was increased-my little corner of the soap box.
Didn’t Steve say people want to buy their music, not rent? I haven’t downloaded more than a few songs since the price was increased-my little corner of the soap box.
Different folks different strokes. It’s smart and sensible business for Apple to offer choices to a wide variety of music lovers to further improve its ecosystem.
Different folks different strokes. It’s smart and sensible business for Apple to offer choices to a wide variety of music lovers to further improve its ecosystem.
Music subscriptions just add a layer of abstraction between the buyer and the artist. How are the correct artist ever going to see the money from this scheme?
It’s like how Satellite and Cable compares force you to pay for channels you don’t want. The wrong things get funded using money that was never intended for those purposes.
It “makes” me mad.
Music subscriptions just add a layer of abstraction between the buyer and the artist. How are the correct artist ever going to see the money from this scheme?
It’s like how Satellite and Cable compares force you to pay for channels you don’t want. The wrong things get funded using money that was never intended for those purposes.
It “makes” me mad.
Steve said a lot of things. So what? When are you folks going to learn that he doesn’t give a shit about a perceived lack of consistency in his statements? Things change, the ground shifts under you. You either adapt or get left behind while another company capitalizes.
Maybe five or six years ago when the landscape was different, those were his thoughts. But guess what? A whole lot of shit has happened since then, like selling tens of millions of phones with 3G (and soon 4G) connections that can provide a streaming cloud music experience which would make subscriptions more attractive.
Steve said a lot of things. So what? When are you folks going to learn that he doesn’t give a shit about a perceived lack of consistency in his statements? Things change, the ground shifts under you. You either adapt or get left behind while another company capitalizes.
Maybe five or six years ago when the landscape was different, those were his thoughts. But guess what? A whole lot of shit has happened since then, like selling tens of millions of phones with 3G (and soon 4G) connections that can provide a streaming cloud music experience which would make subscriptions more attractive.
I tell you what, $0.99 DRM free tracks for purchase, and discounted complete albums or partial albums – buy 5 get one free, buy 10 get two free might work. $1.29 = a 29% charge over the original cost – or the desire of the cartels to push the album price back up to $12.99 instead of $9.99.
I’d rather purchase CD’s again or buy elsewhere than pay for a subscription.
I tell you what, $0.99 DRM free tracks for purchase, and discounted complete albums or partial albums – buy 5 get one free, buy 10 get two free might work. $1.29 = a 29% charge over the original cost – or the desire of the cartels to push the album price back up to $12.99 instead of $9.99.
I’d rather purchase CD’s again or buy elsewhere than pay for a subscription.
Bring back Lala, jerkoffs! I love making money as an Apple investor but as a user, that is one thing that really ticked me off. Let me pay a dime for unlimited streaming, without clogging up my hard drive! And let me do it over mobile too! I spent more on unlimited-streaming licenses at ten cents per track during six months of Lala membership than I have for overpriced MP3 downloads over the last five years combined. And was waaay happier about it! Let’s face it, if you have to download, bittorrent is just as convenient… Whereas Lala let you explore tracks w/ instant streaming at 10 cents a pop. Bring it back! Jerkoffs buy and kill a good thing like that to eliminate competition, good people buy it and improve it and make it more popular. Which is Apple? Time is getting late to show us they’re the latter.
Bring back Lala, jerkoffs! I love making money as an Apple investor but as a user, that is one thing that really ticked me off. Let me pay a dime for unlimited streaming, without clogging up my hard drive! And let me do it over mobile too! I spent more on unlimited-streaming licenses at ten cents per track during six months of Lala membership than I have for overpriced MP3 downloads over the last five years combined. And was waaay happier about it! Let’s face it, if you have to download, bittorrent is just as convenient… Whereas Lala let you explore tracks w/ instant streaming at 10 cents a pop. Bring it back! Jerkoffs buy and kill a good thing like that to eliminate competition, good people buy it and improve it and make it more popular. Which is Apple? Time is getting late to show us they’re the latter.
This should include an option to keep X number of songs songs per month.
This should include an option to keep X number of songs songs per month.
We don’t need no stinking Subscriptions!
We don’t need no stinking Subscriptions!
I’d be into this if it worked like Zune Pass and I could actually download the music and put it on any iOS device (appletv) included. I don’t want to have to stream it. Though that’d be cool with Genius mixes.
I’m sure it would optional and you could still buy songs just like you can now, so I don’t see what the big deal is if you don’t like it.
I’d be into this if it worked like Zune Pass and I could actually download the music and put it on any iOS device (appletv) included. I don’t want to have to stream it. Though that’d be cool with Genius mixes.
I’m sure it would optional and you could still buy songs just like you can now, so I don’t see what the big deal is if you don’t like it.
i have around 4,000 songs from itunes, but i have almost completely stopped downloading music since the price was increased.
i have around 4,000 songs from itunes, but i have almost completely stopped downloading music since the price was increased.
I guess, if true, Steve woke up to the fact that some people just want to rent their music!
For Steve to say songs should be bought for .99¢ when the business that “owns” it has other ideas is reminisce, and not fondly, of the current thinking in Washington! Downloads are down, just as Jobs are down. Apple, like the government, CAN get in the way of progress with their stalwart way of thinking of how things SHOULD be according to them and their philosophy. So much for that.
And Greedy music cartels raise hit tracks to 1.29 from .99… those BASTARDS! However, I’m surprised that some people on here who are quick to chime in about the “rich” that want to keep their money instead of the government taxing it, post dumb ass responses like I guess you don’t want teachers, police, firemen, clean water, clean air, yada, yada, yada.
Let’s see, the U.S. gives a boatload of bucks to Pakistan for their military and social programs. What do we get in return, a news report that the Pakistan ISS (their version of the CIA) is encouraging Taliban to attack U.S. soldiers and America’s Interests, like support material for those soldiers. Well that was tax money well spent!
Anyway, I digress… How come I don’t hear from some in the MDN crowd, support for increased prices in song tracks? You GREEDY SOB’s… don’t you know what it costs the music cartel for you to get that music, to promote that concert, not to mention the sh*t they have to put up with from some of the “so called” talent that think the world of music will stop without them!
I say $1.50 for purchase to own and $25.00/mo subscription for one price for all songs! None of this tier pricing crap! These rates won’t effect me. I’ve stopped listening and buying songs some twenty years ago!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue laugh” style=”border:0;” />
I guess, if true, Steve woke up to the fact that some people just want to rent their music!
For Steve to say songs should be bought for .99¢ when the business that “owns” it has other ideas is reminisce, and not fondly, of the current thinking in Washington! Downloads are down, just as Jobs are down. Apple, like the government, CAN get in the way of progress with their stalwart way of thinking of how things SHOULD be according to them and their philosophy. So much for that.
And Greedy music cartels raise hit tracks to 1.29 from .99… those BASTARDS! However, I’m surprised that some people on here who are quick to chime in about the “rich” that want to keep their money instead of the government taxing it, post dumb ass responses like I guess you don’t want teachers, police, firemen, clean water, clean air, yada, yada, yada.
Let’s see, the U.S. gives a boatload of bucks to Pakistan for their military and social programs. What do we get in return, a news report that the Pakistan ISS (their version of the CIA) is encouraging Taliban to attack U.S. soldiers and America’s Interests, like support material for those soldiers. Well that was tax money well spent!
Anyway, I digress… How come I don’t hear from some in the MDN crowd, support for increased prices in song tracks? You GREEDY SOB’s… don’t you know what it costs the music cartel for you to get that music, to promote that concert, not to mention the sh*t they have to put up with from some of the “so called” talent that think the world of music will stop without them!
I say $1.50 for purchase to own and $25.00/mo subscription for one price for all songs! None of this tier pricing crap! These rates won’t effect me. I’ve stopped listening and buying songs some twenty years ago!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue laugh” style=”border:0;” />
Jobs has tried hard and long to make his vision of music consumption a reality. The major labels have wanted little to no part of it, probably largely to their reluctance to hand Apple yet more influence over the business. That Jobs/Apple is/are willing to change gears in order to improve music availability at an affordable price is worth applauding.
Re renting music, I know as many people who like it as who don’t. I personally buy all my music, mainly through iTunes, but I often stream music through the radio stations offered through iTunes (a form of subscription in my view). I’ve bought a few albums after hearing tunes on the radio, although most of my discoveries are made by looking at what other artists/albums are suggested while sampling an album. All that’s to say that I guess I’m not into a subscription model personally but don’t want to block that choice for people who want it.
Finally, I don’t find the $1.29-per-song price point too high. It has no impact on my purchasing decision. My only beef with it is that not enough money gets to the artists. I wish artists would start forming production collectives and market their works directly through iTunes.