Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Anybody seen a $.69 iTunes Track?

Anybody seen a $.69 iTunes Track?
Thread Tools
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 05:15 PM
 
Variable pricing was implemented on iTunes today. Plenty of $1.29 songs are available. However, everything else appears to be $.99. Despite the pledge by the labels that there would be a 10 - 1 ratio between $.69 tracks and $1.29 tracks. I've looked and couldn't find a single $.69 track. Even among really old music.

Has anyone found any $.69 tracks yet? Post the iTunes URL if you have.

OAW
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 05:19 PM
 
Probably because the labels were lying as usual. They're going to shoot themselves in the foot by first raising all the prices to $3.99 for popular tracks, and $1.99 for 99.99% of everything else they publish, then wonder why everyone just stopped buying music.

Then they'll have Metallica sue a bunch of autistic kids with no internet access, and blame it all on Apple.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Dakar V
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 05:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
Probably because the labels were lying as usual. They're going to shoot themselves in the foot by first raising all the prices to $3.99 for popular tracks, and $1.99 for 99.99% of everything else they publish, then wonder why everyone just stopped buying music.
This depends. If you believe the conspiracy theories, this another step to help drive customers from iTunes to Amazon with its still 99¢ pricing.
     
Apple Pro Underwear
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: NYC*Crooklyn
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 05:25 PM
 
they're going to force Amazon to do this too probably
     
Dakar V
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 05:26 PM
 
I think so too. Just a case of contract renewals not lining up.
     
Salty
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 05:41 PM
 
Good point, even some of the old stuff in my library is 99 cents. Nice thing is though none of the artists I listen to are probably gonna get sold for more
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 05:41 PM
 
If this stuff isn't 69¢, I can't imagine what would be.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
ort888
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 06:17 PM
 
I wasn't buying at 99 cents and I won't at $1.29.

Maybe every once in a while, but overall??? No thank you. Pass.

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Oisín
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 06:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
Then they'll have Metallica sue a bunch of autistic kids with no internet access, and blame it all on Apple.
I actualol’d.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 08:51 PM
 
I haven't seen 69¢ tracks, but I've seen $1.29 tracks... Lots of 'em.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
HenryMelton
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hutto Texas, or on the road
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 09:06 PM
 
Downloaded the featured .69 'Rock' album, on the basis of a couple of songs I'd heard of. I'm in the process of ranking them. Only one has earned a 1-star (to be deleted) yet.

Later: Make it two, thus far.
( Last edited by HenryMelton; Apr 7, 2009 at 09:11 PM. Reason: Second Thoughts)
     
migel628
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 09:55 PM
 
I've never been a big fan of iTunes (DRM or not), so I'll deal w/ their variable pricing by not buying.
     
finboy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 7, 2009, 11:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post

Then they'll have Metallica sue a bunch of autistic kids with no internet access, and blame it all on Apple.
WTF? Explain that please.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 01:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
WTF? Explain that please.
The RIAA and Metallica are both known for suing music fans. The RIAA in particular is famous for ridiculous lawsuits against really helpless victims who likely haven't even done anything (like a granny who doesn't know how to use a PC).
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 02:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post
WTF? Explain that please.
Did you just magically pop into this world three years ago?

Seeing as you were around the internet around 2000, I really can't see how you missed this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIuR5TNyL8Y

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
scottiB
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Near Antietam Creek
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 09:20 AM
 
Saw a couple Charles Mingus tunes for 69 cents.
     
Dakar V
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The New Posts Button
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 09:49 AM
 
I think I read somewhere this morning that prices are up on Amazon and Wal•Mart already.

Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Despite the pledge by the labels that there would be a 10 - 1 ratio between $.69 tracks and $1.29 tracks.
Does anyone have a link to this quote handy?

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Did you just magically pop into this world three years ago?

Seeing as you were around the internet around 2000, I really can't see how you missed this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIuR5TNyL8Y
Nice, exactly what I was thinking of.
( Last edited by Dakar V; Apr 8, 2009 at 10:13 AM. )
     
moep
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 10:07 AM
 
I’m so pissed about this.

First they (record labels) whine about piracy all day long and the next thing they do is jack up the prices for the honest people who pay for the music in the iTMS. During an economic recession. That’ll work.

Unrelated to this but just a few months ago they (again, the record lables) tried to pull another 300€ out of my pocket for stripping the DRM from a part of my already purchased files.



**** you. At this point I honestly regret every single one of my 3500 iTMS purchases, even though I at least stripped them from DRM using Requiem.

By the way, the prices at most other popular online music stores were already adjusted as well.

The Pirate Bay has me back. Spotify is great too.
</rant>
( Last edited by moep; Apr 8, 2009 at 01:13 PM. )
"The road to success is dotted with the most tempting parking spaces."
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 10:13 AM
 
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/m...rancisco-2009/

Pricing model is discussed starting at 1:23:00.

“I can tell you we know already that more songs are going to be offered at 69 than 1.29, so there is going to be a benefit for a lot of customers.”

In the German iTunes Store there are currently 14 songs of the top 100 offered for 1.29 and 1 for 0.69. Now this could be because top 100 songs are usually newer. However, I can not find any other song for 0.69 no matter how old the music is I'm looking at. It's no problem to see 1.29 songs.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 10:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by moep View Post
First they (record labels) whine about piracy all day long and the next thing they do is jack up the prices for the honest people who pay for the music in the iTMS.
The record companies didn't jack up the price in your beloved iTMS. Apple did.

Originally Posted by moep View Post
Unrelated to this but just a few months ago they (again, the record lables) tried to pull another 300€ out of my pocket for stripping the DRM from a part of my already purchased files.
You're having a really hard time working out the difference between record labels and Apple, no?
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
MallyMal
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 10:29 AM
 
     
moep
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 10:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
The record companies didn't jack up the price in your beloved iTMS. Apple did.

You're having a really hard time working out the difference between record labels and Apple, no?
And so did Amazon as well as Walmart? They all raised the prices at the same time, just for kicks and not because they were “asked to"? Please elaborate.
"The road to success is dotted with the most tempting parking spaces."
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 10:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by moep View Post
And so did Amazon as well as Walmart? They all raised the prices at the same time, just for kicks and not because they were “asked to"? Please elaborate.
So you're telling me that the record labels own Apple, Amazon and Walmart?
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
moep
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 10:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
So you're telling me that the record labels own Apple, Amazon and Walmart?
Am I? Where?
"The road to success is dotted with the most tempting parking spaces."
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 10:54 AM
 
Doofy, doesn't know what a wholesale price is.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 11:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
Doofy, doesn't know what a wholesale price is.
I know that nobody forces anybody to buy anything they don't want to. Wholesale or otherwise.

Labels: "Your new price is blah blah blah".
Apple: "We're not paying that. F off."
Amazon: "We're not paying that either. F off."
Walmart: "Neither are we. F off".

See how that works?
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 11:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
So you're telling me that the record labels own Apple, Amazon and Walmart?
They don't own them, but they do control them in that they have the ability to impose contractual obligations on them.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 11:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
They don't own them, but they do control them in that they have the ability to impose contractual obligations on them.
And those companies have the ability to not sign those contracts. The major record labels would not enjoy having nowhere to sell their crap.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 11:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
Doofy, doesn't know what a wholesale price is.
Doofy doesn't understand supple and demand and those who control the supply of the commodity can regulate the demand of a commodity (and by regulating the demand the supplier can regulate, or control, the price of the commodity).

Of course, this is really a lesson in captive markets and cartel-capitalism. If you get a limited number of suppliers for a commodity to agree on a uniform, consistent pricing strategy for said commodity--in this case, digital music files--then you have a cartel that regulates the demand for their product.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 11:58 AM
 
I wish you boys would come and show me how the music biz works. With your expertise I could earn loads more money and get another Ferrari. Blue with cream seats this time, I reckon.

Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 12:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
I know that nobody forces anybody to buy anything they don't want to. Wholesale or otherwise.

Labels: "Your new price is blah blah blah".
Apple: "We're not paying that. F off."
Amazon: "We're not paying that either. F off."
Walmart: "Neither are we. F off".

See how that works?
Right. And when the barrel of oil goes up in price, gas stations could just say F off and only sell magazines and crisps. But somehow that never seems to happen.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 12:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
Right. And when the barrel of oil goes up in price, gas stations could just say F off and only sell magazines and crisps. But somehow that never seems to happen.
So, that'd be like Apple only selling computers, Amazon only selling books and Walmart only selling everything under the sun? You're right - I don't know how they'd survive without selling mp3s.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
ort888
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 01:19 PM
 
It's a cat and mouse game where both parties need each other. If the big record companies all pulled out of iTunes and went to Amazon, it would be bad for Apple... so they have to play ball.

It was easier for Apple to tell the record companies to F off before they had any real competition. The landscape is a little different now.

Doofy likes to take really complicated issues and boil them down into 2 sentence absolutes. It's just not that simple.

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 01:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
It's a cat and mouse game where both parties need each other. If the big record companies all pulled out of iTunes and went to Amazon, it would be bad for Apple... so they have to play ball.

It was easier for Apple to tell the record companies to F off before they had any real competition. The landscape is a little different now.

Doofy likes to take really complicated issues and boil them down into 2 sentence absolutes. It's just not that simple.
You're right, it's not that simple. Apple now has plenty of content provided by companies outside the big four. That coming in off TuneCore, for example. So, plenty of content on its own terms (same with Amazon). And it's not like the plebs out there in iPod land care whether they're listening to what the big four's marketing departments are telling them to listen to or not.

Plus, of course, Amazon is looking at what Apple do. Walmart is looking at what Amazon do. If Apple says FO to the big labels because of a price increase, Amazon could either follow suit (if they fancied more profit) or fill (if they fancied more turnover). But then they'd also have to be watching what Walmart did. If Walmart followed while Amazon filled, Amazon could find itself in a monopoly situation, which wouldn't go down well in court.
Since these companies don't tend to like to innovate and instead simply follow (with quantum leaps here and there), if Apple said FO I'm 99% sure the rest would too. It's a pack mentality out there in corporate land, especially with the current economic climate.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 02:14 PM
 
While iTunes is a wonderful way for me to discover new artists (or at least new to me), I don't depend on them for my digital music. I rip my CDs so I can listen to them wherever I am, and that has meant lots of wonderful music at my finger tips.

But a lot of people DO depend on iTunes for all of their music, and if Apple sends the big four label companies packing, it would be Very Bad for those labels. And while they may be evil and scum suckers (they're the driving force behind the RIAA after all), they aren't completely stupid. When and if a label's deals with Apple don't suit Apple, that label will have some work to do to get back into Apple's good graces or risk losing a huge market.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 02:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
I wish you boys would come and show me how the music biz works. With your expertise I could earn loads more money and get another Ferrari. Blue with cream seats this time, I reckon.

How much time have you spent on the distribution and marketing side of the music biz as opposed to the creation and production side of the music biz?


Besides, you don't *have* a Ferrari. . . . Unless you have other vehicles you don't tell us about besides your beloved American Jeeps.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 02:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
How much time have you spent on the distribution and marketing side of the music biz as opposed to the creation and production side of the music biz?
The buck stops here.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
moep
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 02:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
[…]if Apple said FO I'm 99% sure the rest would too. It's a pack mentality out there in corporate land, especially with the current economic climate.[…]
We’ve been there before and it didn’t quite work out like that.

iTunes, NBC, Amazon
"The road to success is dotted with the most tempting parking spaces."
     
ctt1wbw
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Suffolk, VA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 03:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Variable pricing was implemented on iTunes today. Plenty of $1.29 songs are available. However, everything else appears to be $.99. Despite the pledge by the labels that there would be a 10 - 1 ratio between $.69 tracks and $1.29 tracks. I've looked and couldn't find a single $.69 track. Even among really old music.

Has anyone found any $.69 tracks yet? Post the iTunes URL if you have.

OAW
President Bush made Apple do it. It's Bush's fault.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 03:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
While iTunes is a wonderful way for me to discover new artists (or at least new to me), I don't depend on them for my digital music. I rip my CDs so I can listen to them wherever I am, and that has meant lots of wonderful music at my finger tips.

But a lot of people DO depend on iTunes for all of their music, and if Apple sends the big four label companies packing, it would be Very Bad for those labels. And while they may be evil and scum suckers (they're the driving force behind the RIAA after all), they aren't completely stupid. When and if a label's deals with Apple don't suit Apple, that label will have some work to do to get back into Apple's good graces or risk losing a huge market.
As this move demonstrates, that doesn't seem to be the case.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 03:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by moep View Post
We’ve been there before and it didn’t quite work out like that.

iTunes, NBC, Amazon
I don't know about TV. I don't do TV.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 04:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
Right. And when the barrel of oil goes up in price, gas stations could just say F off and only sell magazines and crisps. But somehow that never seems to happen.
Actually, that happened a long time ago.

You never noticed how every gas station is now a full-fledged supermarket and bakery and car wash?

Most gas stations now make MORE profit on groceries than they do on petrol, IIRC.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 04:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
As this move demonstrates, that doesn't seem to be the case.
On the contrary, I think it's Apple compromising a little with the labels so that they still get their margin on the label's titles, and the labels get a little bit more money on a few titles. Of course I haven't exhaustively checked to see what titles are now higher priced, but the ones I have seen at $1.29 are not that numerous.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 05:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
On the contrary, I think it's Apple compromising a little with the labels so that they still get their margin on the label's titles, and the labels get a little bit more money on a few titles. Of course I haven't exhaustively checked to see what titles are now higher priced, but the ones I have seen at $1.29 are not that numerous.
Apple has rejected this idea several times before. The only difference is that now there's Amazon. So yes, it is Apple compromising with the labels — which means, as I said, that Apple doesn't feel like it can tell them to take a hike if the terms don't suit them.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 05:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakar V View Post

Does anyone have a link to this quote handy?
Perhaps anticipating a consumer backlash against price increases executives, who spoke to Reuters on background ahead of the launch, pointed out that for every one song they raise to $1.29 they will be reducing 10 songs to 69 cents.
Source

OAW
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 05:35 PM
 
Day 2 and still no significant number of $.69 tracks huh?

OAW
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 05:39 PM
 
Apple is gonna take a pounding over this. Promising $0.69 and not delivering is worse than never removing DRM at all.

If the record companies drag their feet on lower prices, I can see Apple suing them. Maybe.
     
moep
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 06:00 PM
 
Ars has a decent article on this.

http://arstechnica.com/media/news/20...apsody-too.ars

Like Apple, Lala has been up front about the pricing changes that the labels have managed to negotiate into their contracts with digital music distributors. In a company blog post on Tuesday, April 7, Lala offered a little more info than Apple by calling this variable pricing "an industry shift." Lala says the price changes will be slowly arriving "in the coming weeks," suggesting that more tracks may rise from 99¢ to $1.29 (or even drop to 69¢) across all music retailers.
All this "variable pricing" talk is — to me — just pretty marketing for a plain and simple price increase.
"The road to success is dotted with the most tempting parking spaces."
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 07:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Apple has rejected this idea several times before. The only difference is that now there's Amazon. So yes, it is Apple compromising with the labels — which means, as I said, that Apple doesn't feel like it can tell them to take a hike if the terms don't suit them.
Or that they thought they could cash in on the price change and make a little more themselves.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2009, 08:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Or that they thought they could cash in on the price change and make a little more themselves.
Apple never thought that on the several occasions they rejected it before. So they just randomly did a 180, and the fact that it was around the same time the other retailers went to that pricing structure was a total coincidence?
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:31 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,