Sign In
Register
Help
Specifically what I'd want is the option to buy an "iTMS Club Card" type thing for a set fee, although the card would be virtual (or not if bought in a store). The benefits would be that you'd be able to play entire songs before buying, rather than only getting a little snippet of the song, and you'd get a discount on purchases for some set number of purchases. The card would not expire, but after you use up your discounts you have to buy another "card" to get the discounts again. The full length preview service would not allow you to add the previews to your library, iPod, nor even to a playlist, so this would not be the same as a subscription service. It would be strictly a full-length preview within the iTMS.
This is exactly how the club card for my local record store works. I think it's a great idea. It gives them money from me ahead of time, and it gives me discounts in the long term, plus the option to preview full tracks before buying. Everybody wins. For example the card might cost $10 and with it you get $2 off of each of your next 10 full albums purchased, however long it takes you to buy 10 albums. You end up paying $10 less than you would have, and they get $10 of your money ahead of time. To keep it simple it would probably make sense to have it be an "album buyers club", rather than trying to figure out combinations of discounts on albums and individual tracks. That would do for me as I generally only buy full albums.
Napster counters iTunes with new To Go service
MultiQuote#86 Guest__*
Posted 03 February 2005 - 12:41 PM
"...your device must phone home to tell Napster..."
So if the device has to phone home to Napster each month are they also keeping track of the songs I play and how many times I play them and sending that information also? This tracking can be easily done and I wonder if Microsoft has an API in their WMA 10 to easily allow implementation of this "feature?
So if the device has to phone home to Napster each month are they also keeping track of the songs I play and how many times I play them and sending that information also? This tracking can be easily done and I wonder if Microsoft has an API in their WMA 10 to easily allow implementation of this "feature?
#87
dbranam 
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 15
- Joined: 31-August 04
Posted 03 February 2005 - 12:41 PM
Jeff,
I think you are confusing the issue. DRM is a seperate issue and a moot one since they both use it. What we are debating is the subscription model vs. the retail model that Apple uses. Your analogy to a TV or cable is also not helpful. As has been pointed out, music is different than other media. People buy music to keep and to play over and over again. It is a very personal medium and people will always prefer to own it than have to pay a subscription to play it and keep it.
I think you are confusing the issue. DRM is a seperate issue and a moot one since they both use it. What we are debating is the subscription model vs. the retail model that Apple uses. Your analogy to a TV or cable is also not helpful. As has been pointed out, music is different than other media. People buy music to keep and to play over and over again. It is a very personal medium and people will always prefer to own it than have to pay a subscription to play it and keep it.
#88
jmincey
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4,228
- Joined: 27-August 04
Posted 03 February 2005 - 12:44 PM
"What we are debating is the subscription model vs. the retail model that Apple uses."
Agreed, except that some of the objections raised here to subscription services are actually intrinsic to DRM. This is why I bring this point to light, not to suggest that as a result of DRM one approach is better than the other but only to say that the supposed evils of DRM are just that -- evils of DRM and not of subscription services or purchase services.
Agreed, except that some of the objections raised here to subscription services are actually intrinsic to DRM. This is why I bring this point to light, not to suggest that as a result of DRM one approach is better than the other but only to say that the supposed evils of DRM are just that -- evils of DRM and not of subscription services or purchase services.
#89
sjohnson11
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 03-February 05
Posted 03 February 2005 - 12:45 PM
I just left on vacation and forgot to sync my player. Now my player stops working while I'm out of town, and I would really like to use it in the car or on the plane. How many of you would be upset by this? /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif
#90
jmincey
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4,228
- Joined: 27-August 04
Posted 03 February 2005 - 12:48 PM
I would be very upset indeed. But this is the result of enforcement strategies (such as DRM) and is not an evil intrinsic to subscription services themselves.
How upset would you be if after downloading and installing upgrades to iTunes and your iPod you discover that they no longer play legacy files purchased prior to a certain date? The iTMS EULA allows for this possibility.
How upset would you be if after downloading and installing upgrades to iTunes and your iPod you discover that they no longer play legacy files purchased prior to a certain date? The iTMS EULA allows for this possibility.
#91 Guest__*
Posted 03 February 2005 - 12:51 PM
"You CAN drive 100 miles per hour on the highways as well. Does this translate in your mind into authorization to do so?"
Why would authorization be needed in the example you cited? Authorization is in fact not needed or required just an awareness that the cause and effect of your actions cannot be ultimately suspended!
Why would authorization be needed in the example you cited? Authorization is in fact not needed or required just an awareness that the cause and effect of your actions cannot be ultimately suspended!
#92
sjohnson11
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 03-February 05
Posted 03 February 2005 - 12:54 PM
That would be fine by me, because I have already burned my collection to CD... /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
#93
macpuppy
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 16
- Joined: 29-September 04
Posted 03 February 2005 - 12:58 PM
Oh, no, not YAPK!
(Yet Another iPod Killer!)
My 99 cents:
Compare this concept to, say, software subscriptions.
With purchased software, you own it to the extent that you can use it until it is incompatible with your computer's operating system or hardware. Just like downloaded songs. But with music, the CD player and MP3 format is so ubiquitous and the digitial format can be transferred to different media that it is unlikely to become obsolete, so you should be able to listen to your "Britney Spears" /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif downloads even when you are 95 (and by that age anyway - anything will sound good!)
With the subscription model, you lose use of the software if you don't pay up, but you can be assured (in theory) of continued support and updates. WIth music, well, eh, nothing to update, nothing to support, you just lose the music if you don't pay (which might be considered an advantage /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif - do you really want to even remeber Britney at 95? :-)). The only benefit is volume/price.
Of course the model might work that if you miss a payement, you are simply locked out of the subscribed music, and you will be able to access it again if you start up you subscription. I can't see how they would have the nerve to do otherwise.
But then again...what happens if the subscription service goes out of business and no one picks it up.../forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
Somehow I think that subscription music will be less popular than subscription software.
But then I'm the type of person who would rather buy software than rent it,
and buy a car rather than lease.
(Yet Another iPod Killer!)
My 99 cents:
Compare this concept to, say, software subscriptions.
With purchased software, you own it to the extent that you can use it until it is incompatible with your computer's operating system or hardware. Just like downloaded songs. But with music, the CD player and MP3 format is so ubiquitous and the digitial format can be transferred to different media that it is unlikely to become obsolete, so you should be able to listen to your "Britney Spears" /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif downloads even when you are 95 (and by that age anyway - anything will sound good!)
With the subscription model, you lose use of the software if you don't pay up, but you can be assured (in theory) of continued support and updates. WIth music, well, eh, nothing to update, nothing to support, you just lose the music if you don't pay (which might be considered an advantage /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif - do you really want to even remeber Britney at 95? :-)). The only benefit is volume/price.
Of course the model might work that if you miss a payement, you are simply locked out of the subscribed music, and you will be able to access it again if you start up you subscription. I can't see how they would have the nerve to do otherwise.
But then again...what happens if the subscription service goes out of business and no one picks it up.../forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
Somehow I think that subscription music will be less popular than subscription software.
But then I'm the type of person who would rather buy software than rent it,
and buy a car rather than lease.
#94
cantthinkofaname
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 8
- Joined: 15-October 02
Posted 03 February 2005 - 12:58 PM
Before everyone gets into hypotheticals, the reality is that DRM's exist. Would it be great if you could get a subscription service without a DRM? Hell yeah, anyone would download away for 15 bucks if it meant you KEPT the music. (Insert argument about hacking Janus.)
You have to have a DRM if you selling music digitally. (Insert "fair use" argument here.) Any use of technology has it's limits. It's up the consumer to choose if those limits still allow the consumer to use the technology.
You have to have a DRM if you selling music digitally. (Insert "fair use" argument here.) Any use of technology has it's limits. It's up the consumer to choose if those limits still allow the consumer to use the technology.
#95
DS9Sisko
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 15
- Joined: 11-January 05
Posted 03 February 2005 - 01:11 PM
Prior to this story coming out, I had several (separate) discussions with about 10 or so my PC-using friends about iPods (some considering purchase and others comparing players). They were asking me about iTunes, blah blah blah and the issue of Napster and other pending subscritpion services came up. Without any kind of advocacy for or opposition against, wither model I explained as best I could the idea behind subscriptions.
And every single person so far has rejected the subscription model based on the following: miss a payment, lose the music.
For all of the discussion here about the vagaries of DRM, subscription vs. retail, business strategy, etc., most users are going to make their decisions based on whether or not it makes SENSE to spend X-number of dollars a month for a library catalog they will most likely not use and which can be taken away if they miss a payment. (And never mind the people who will forget, miss, or in some other way fail to sync their music players and lose the music....I would NOT want to work in any part of customer service handling those calls).
Napster to Go won't fail because music subscriptions are a bad business model. It will fail because the cons far outweigh the pros.
And every single person so far has rejected the subscription model based on the following: miss a payment, lose the music.
For all of the discussion here about the vagaries of DRM, subscription vs. retail, business strategy, etc., most users are going to make their decisions based on whether or not it makes SENSE to spend X-number of dollars a month for a library catalog they will most likely not use and which can be taken away if they miss a payment. (And never mind the people who will forget, miss, or in some other way fail to sync their music players and lose the music....I would NOT want to work in any part of customer service handling those calls).
Napster to Go won't fail because music subscriptions are a bad business model. It will fail because the cons far outweigh the pros.
#96
dbranam
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 15
- Joined: 31-August 04
Posted 03 February 2005 - 01:23 PM
Jeff,
I believe you are mistaken. Napster's plug-in and recharge feature is a scam to require people to not cancel their subscription. They may pay lip service to protecting copyrights but what they want is to "lock in" subscribers.
I believe you are mistaken. Napster's plug-in and recharge feature is a scam to require people to not cancel their subscription. They may pay lip service to protecting copyrights but what they want is to "lock in" subscribers.
#97
dean_o
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 54
- Joined: 11-January 05
Posted 03 February 2005 - 01:41 PM
[indent]In reply to:
Please explain to me, other than the immense guilability of the American consumer, why anyone would pick a subscription service over a retail iTunes model. Maybe I'm missing something.
[/indent]
No, you're not missing anything. Gullability is a good an explanation as any. I'm not saying I think subscriptions are a good product. I'm just saying that for whatever reason there's probably a market for them out there, and somebody will (maybe Napster, maybe not) will tap that market. That market is really the only market they can tap because Apple is so far ahead of everyone else in the pay-per-song space. No one else can offer anything in that space that Apple doesn't already do much better.
Please explain to me, other than the immense guilability of the American consumer, why anyone would pick a subscription service over a retail iTunes model. Maybe I'm missing something.
[/indent]
No, you're not missing anything. Gullability is a good an explanation as any. I'm not saying I think subscriptions are a good product. I'm just saying that for whatever reason there's probably a market for them out there, and somebody will (maybe Napster, maybe not) will tap that market. That market is really the only market they can tap because Apple is so far ahead of everyone else in the pay-per-song space. No one else can offer anything in that space that Apple doesn't already do much better.
#98
Skillz
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 03-February 05
Posted 03 February 2005 - 01:47 PM
[indent]In reply to:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the iTMS on its own has been profitable at least for the past quarter or two.
[/indent]
I haven't seen what the net profit for Apple has been from the iTMS recently. I just remember reading that the 99 cent price model is below cost. Unless the licensing deals have changed and Apple is now getting a bigger cut of the 99 cents I don't see how they could make money off just the music. If you're selling a product below cost then no matter how much you sell you can't make a profit.
Music players, OTOH, have nice big profit margins. I don't remember the exact numbers but they cost something like $50 to make and they are sold for $300.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the iTMS on its own has been profitable at least for the past quarter or two.
[/indent]
I haven't seen what the net profit for Apple has been from the iTMS recently. I just remember reading that the 99 cent price model is below cost. Unless the licensing deals have changed and Apple is now getting a bigger cut of the 99 cents I don't see how they could make money off just the music. If you're selling a product below cost then no matter how much you sell you can't make a profit.
Music players, OTOH, have nice big profit margins. I don't remember the exact numbers but they cost something like $50 to make and they are sold for $300.
