Did Apple Make A Good Decision?

[Mr. Rogu]

If you are a iTunes user like i am, then you probably know that the majority of songs are now $1.29 instead of 99 cents. It might be only a 30 cent increase of payment for buying songs but all that adds up. I just recently got a $15.00 iTunes gift card so i can buy some more songs. Instead of being able to buy 15 songs, i can now only buy around 12 songs per card.

The reason Apple is doing this is because of record labels and how popular the song is. I personally think this is kinda BS cause now, I'm paying the same amount for less. To all of you people that actually legally download music from iTunes, do you think what Apple did was a smart move, especially in this economy right now?

 

[Nysyarc]

Firstly, just make sure your signature isn't included in your posts in the DH. Just edit your post, go to advanced edit and then uncheck the box that says 'show signature'.

I don't download songs from iTunes myself, so I hadn't even heard about that until reading your post. I think if they just made this move recently, then it's too early to know if it will be a bad decision. Obviously if people don't download nearly as many songs as a result, Apple will have to switch back to the old price or come up with new offers to entice downloads again.

Somehow I think they aren't going to make much less money, if any less at all because of this choice. In fact they could very well make more. People will always download iTunes songs, because it's made so easy. Apple obviously realized that and figured they would try and make more money off the more popular songs, which makes sense, and I can almost guarantee you it will work.

I'm not really sure how debatable this is, I mean I can't see any big controversial focal point. Sure it might be frustrating for regular customers at first, but I think it is a smart move by Apple, and people will get accustomed to it as time goes on.

Any other opinions?

 

[BOB SAGET!]

Well some people feel APPLE is the only company that are worth spending music on. Sure, people want the brand name products. It was a smart move by APPLE in a way. But people can just get an MP3 player and download songs for free. Thats what I do. Instead of Itunes try MP3 Rocket. Search any song u want and download it for free.

 

[Ryan Ludovic]

The only time I use iTunes is when there's an iTunes specific release, or when a band releases their album early on iTunes.
Ex. 12 Stone Toddler released their Scheming album on iTunes almost 5 months earlier than they released it physically. I wound up buying a physical copy also to have for collectors reasons and because the artwork was not included on iTunes.

I believe it was a wise idea by iTunes. The customers read it as 'more money for the artists', even if it is or isnt, apple gets payed more, and those who 'boycott' it probably won't last all that long that it would impact their profits negatively.

For the image of iTunes and Apple, people will add this to their list of stuff they hate and then will bite their lip, and use it anyways. More and more artists are learning, and they'll put their cd up for free download(instead of getting 10 cents a track for), and make all their profits off merch and live shows(where they make almost all their money anyways)

it's just like gas prices. They'll keep rising, people will keep complaining, and then fill up their tank and drive to work.

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

I think it was a good decision on Apple's part, but personally when I saw this I thought it was bull**** and went and started getting music off other sites.

People will still by from iTunes, and they'll still make a lot of money.

I disagree with the gas analogy, as with iTunes people can do what I did and just stop spending money there. Gas is a necessity unless you don't drive or have an electric car. Buying overpriced music is not.

 

[BOB SAGET!]

I agree with SOLID, there r many different ways to download and listen to music. Check my last post for examples.

 

[Mr. Rogu]

but now Apple is gonna have a REAL competition. Amazon.com still has mp3s for only 99 cents. Plus all the other sites that offer free mp3 downloads. i might not trust at least half of those but still. I think we might see a step up from Amazon soon.

im just saying that Apple had a good thing goin here. basically a dollar a song, but now its like the double cheeseburger at Micky Ds, you gotta pay another 20 to 30 cents.

 

[Teran]

I didn't know people who'd been on the internet for more than an hour used iTunes to get music.

I guess the RIAA is slowly trying to claw back the money it's lost to P2P Music Sharing Clients. Also, artists can charge you whatever the hell they want for their music, since it's their work and they can value it how they want.

Doesn't mean you have to pay for it though.

 

[xLeafybug =D]

I don't use iTunes for music, so I'm finding this a hard topic to debate. But based from what you said, that was definitely a smart move Apple made. They're making more money. Some people might get annoyed by this, and find their music elsewhere, but loyal customers will keep buying music from iTunes.

Their profits will only be affected in a positive way, how is that not a good decision?

 

[pizzapie7]

it's just like gas prices. They'll keep rising, people will keep complaining, and then fill up their tank and drive to work.

But there's only one way to fill up a tank, but many ways to purchase music.

Apple made a great move on there part. It was probably put in place because they know that even with all the people they lose, they will still make at least the same amount of money. I haven't been on iTunes in ages, so I don't know how much of the songs cost more now, but I'm guessing its enough so that they don't lose any money to the people who leave to use other options.