Digital music pricing a giant question mark

Wed Jan 7, 2009 11:40AM EST

See Comments (55)

At yesterday's otherwise sleepy MacWorld keynote speech, Apple executive Phil Schiller announced that iTunes would at last be going DRM free by April of this year. Then there was a cryptic note about how pricing was going to change, with songs soon to be available at 69 cents, 99 cents, and $1.29.

On the surface this sounds pretty good, but that's because I, like everyone else, is focusing on the 69 cents part of the announcement. That's a great deal... but you have to wonder how many songs will really be available that cheaply. Obviously the record industry has a different number in mind: The goal clearly being to try to sell the most-purchased music for $1.29.

But will that work? GigaOm has an interesting post today about the potential for that 69 cent price point to condition customers into purchasing only the cheapest tracks, and to expect cheaper, not more expensive, tunes as time wears on.

The record business has always been hit-driven, of course, so $1.29 songs will probably continue to sell reasonably well as long as they're at the top of the charts. As GigaOm points out, nothing has been successful in stopping the iTunes juggernaut, which remains a massive success despite being the most expensive place to buy your music. But the risk of a backlash against a sudden 30 percent price hike is very real, and one which could not just damage the already battered music industry but could also erode Apple's position as the #1 merchant of music as customers finally go looking elsewhere for bargains. Remember that Wal-Mart is actually taking the opposite approach and pricing its hits at 74 cents each. Songs on iTunes will cost nearly twice as much after the tiered pricing hits.

What do you think? Will the tiered pricing strategy work? Or is $1.29 finally going to be enough to drive you to buy music somewhere else?

Comments on Digital music pricing a giant question mark

Post a Comment

Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.

  • 6 Posted by therez0 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 10:05PM EDT Report Abuse

    Just one question... What's iTunes? I've never heard of it. Amazon has always (since they went DRM free at least) been the better place to buy music.

  • 7 Posted by imnotreallyscott on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:23PM EDT Report Abuse

    www.mp3million.com No DRM, albums cost $1.50 or so. Songs are $0.20. Now that's how music should be! I love this site. And they frequently give specials that add to your deposit. I believe the current promotion gives you an additional 20% onto whatever you put in. Good stuff.

  • 8 Posted by dueweke1697 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:49PM EDT Report Abuse

    so stupid- i thought apple was fighting the change in the pricing of music

  • 9 Posted by katstorie on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:47PM EDT Report Abuse

    I thought once you got suckered into using iTunes, like me, you were stuck. Can you actually download songs onto your iPod without using iTunes? Can you buy songs from Amazon and they will show up in your iTunes library? Signed, Technically Challenged

  • 10 Posted by drose11359 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:48PM EDT Report Abuse

    I already buy the vast majority of my music elsewhere - eMusic (great service) and Amazon.

  • 11 Posted by quaksterjohny on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:24PM EDT Report Abuse

    well i dont really use iTunes most of the time....if it is 1.30 i will use it even less

  • 13 Posted by italian.rogue on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:25PM EDT Report Abuse

    if you purchase mp3s from elsewhere ie; amazon etc they will auto import into itunes.

  • 14 Posted by poopars on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:16PM EDT Report Abuse

    If music was like $0.25 per song, then I would actually buy music.

  • 15 Posted by poopars on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:16PM EDT Report Abuse

    If music was like $0.25 per song, then I would actually buy music.

  • 16 Posted by supapassaro on Thu Sep 3, 2009 9:48PM EDT Report Abuse

    I think it's fair, everything rises. If you want to attack someone, go after the labels

  • 17 Posted by deans777 on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:39PM EDT Report Abuse

    @10 The Amazon downloader automatically puts the song in Itunes.

  • 18 Posted by m_knopp on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:32PM EDT Report Abuse

    Overlooking the obvious aren't we? Apple has publicly stated that they did not want this tiered system. They preferred the one price model. Thus, it is music companies and not Apple that are pushing for the $1.29 price. Also, for those of you talking about going to Amazon. How long until the music companies start pushing their songs up to $1.29 as well? If Amazon doesn't like this, well the record companies can always threaten to only let them sale DRM laden music. After all wasn't DRM and the DMCA meant to give rights holders leverage in negotiating?

  • 19 Posted by darling67@sbcglobal.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:36PM EDT Report Abuse

    If the hottest hits are the tunes which will be costing $1.29, then I couldn't care less about the price hike because 98% of today'----- s stink anyway. If older and more classic songs will drop to 69ยข, then great... because they're all that's worth buying these days.

  • 20 Posted by dgriley@pacbell.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:42PM EDT Report Abuse

    It's nice to hear DRM will go. some of my friends use limewire and pay nothing. Audials one tunebite removes DRM, but it's a hassel. Using audials on mp3videoraptor allow many songs to be downloaded free. I like Walmart & Amazon. I used itunes. The bottom line... itunes has to do more and the publishers can't be so greedy.

  • 21 Posted by harrismarc@sbcglobal.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:16PM EDT Report Abuse

    All this will do is push people back to illegal free file sharing sites again...so the record industry really LOSES in the long run.

  • 23 Posted by megan_marie29@sbcglobal.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:15PM EDT Report Abuse

    BestBuy usually offers the cd at $9.99 the first week it comes out. Why not buy the whole thing. Cheaper than buying the songs. Now I know iTunes does this somewhat as well. But, are the cds going to go up as well?

  • 24 Posted by mohindraarvind on Thu Sep 3, 2009 7:24PM EDT Report Abuse

    Music should be offered lossless [well lossless in context from a CD resolution as even CD is lossy compared to studio masters or analog] - i know there are not many people who care about the difference between 128kbps or 320kbps or lossless [flac or m4a - apple lossless]. I would start buying online if the music offered is lossless and at a fair price! no way would i way even 99 cents for lossy 128 bit lousy quality song. I own over 5,000 CDs and close to 1,000 records and like my music legit!

  • 25 Posted by jason.staples@att.net on Thu Sep 3, 2009 4:29PM EDT Report Abuse

    The record labels are shooting themselves in the foot once again and will disenfranchise the end consumer even more. They will never learn. Why would I use iTunes when Amazon recently had the entire U2 U218 (18 songs) MP3 album on sale for $4? Move over Obama, vote Jeff Bezos for President.

Post a Comment


My Tech

Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.

Also on Yahoo! Tech

Computers Home Office Wi-Fi & Networking Phones & PDAs Cameras & Camcorders TV & Home Theater Portable Audio
 

Question and Answer content at Yahoo! Tech is written by Yahoo! users at Yahoo! Answers. Yahoo! does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. For more information, read the Full Disclaimer.

Opinions expressed by the Advisors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Yahoo! Inc. Yahoo! receives no compensation from any manufacturer or distributor nor does it compensate any Advisor for the coverage of any product or service in any Advisor's content.