OT: Recording Industry Ripoff

[Fyron]

"For all his complaints about iTunes and Steve Jobs, Clark's problem really lies with the labels. iTunes, Napster, Virgin Digital, Wippit and co. are all retailers - performance royalties are negotiated by the labels and artists' managers, not by the retailers."

The pricing Apple dictated was 79 cents to the label and 20 cents to Apple, where the label gives out the standard royalty rate to the artists... The proportions really aren't that much different from CDs sold in physical retailers.

[El_Phil]

I think the whole point is that the artists only get 1/2 the rate (percentage wise) for downloads as CDs.

Given Apples power they could pretty much dictate the pricing, as the labels were panicing mildly at the time they got badly screwed by Apple on that deal. Of course they kept a good cut for themselves (they weren't panicing that much) so it was bad for the performers and writers. They are getting much less than standard %s on iTunes sales, of course this is nothing to do with Apple that isn't my complaint about Apple.

My problem is that Apple got a very good deal to start with and fleeced alot of people. Lets be honest they don't do much, certainly not enough to justify a 20% cut. So with their cut now under threat as the record labels start wondering why Apple gets so much money for so little, they accuse everyone else of greed, when they themselves have spent the last few years being epically greedy.

[Fyron]

Lets be honest they don't do much...

Which is precisely why downloaded songs should have an upper cap of 50 cents, not a dollar, or up to two dollars as some of the labels are pushing for... There is a hell of a lot larger profit margin in them than CDs, and for lower quality sound... Until pricing becomes more reasonable, piracy will not be abated.

[Phoenix-D]

El_Phil said:
My problem is that Apple got a very good deal to start with and fleeced alot of people. Lets be honest they don't do much, certainly not enough to justify a 20% cut. So with their cut now under threat as the record labels start wondering why Apple gets so much money for so little, they accuse everyone else of greed, when they themselves have spent the last few years being epically greedy.

Apple doesn't do much?

They host the servers, make the software, etc..and pay all the bandwith costs! This isn't a trival undertaking.

And, er, lets just say I'm rather more inclined to trust the company that hasn't been convicted of price fixing..in this case that'd be Apple.

[El_Phil]

Phoenix-D said:
Apple doesn't do much?

They host the servers, make the software, etc..and pay all the bandwith costs! This isn't a trival undertaking.

And, er, lets just say I'm rather more inclined to trust the company that hasn't been convicted of price fixing..in this case that'd be Apple.

Software, one off cost and not tricky. Bandwith costs while not trivial aren't even close to 10c for a few meg song. Server hosting, not that expensive given the loading involved. None of that lot is worth 20% of the cost of the song. Does any other online retailer claim such an exorbitant markup? Sure the low value and lack of shipping costs make music a bit different, but not that different.

Well as Apple is running a natural monopoly they don't have to price fix. Macs are over priced for what they are, but as competition is impossible for Mac hardware they can't be done for price fixing.

As I said neither side is particularly good, but only Apple is so hypocritical.

[Fyron]

El_Phil said:
Well as Apple is running a natural monopoly they don't have to price fix. Macs are over priced for what they are, but as competition is impossible for Mac hardware they can't be done for price fixing.

With the move to Intel hardware, this will all change...

[Atrocities]

I want to be a rich record industry producer who is so narcisitic that the only thing that matters to me is ME. If the world is being destroyed around me I would be on the phone to my lawyer trying to sue the aliens for wrecking my way of life or something selfish like that. >(

[El_Phil]

Imperator Fyron said:

With the move to Intel hardware, this will all change...

Maybe. Although the only difference hardware-wise between a current Mac and a PC is the motherboard and processor. The rest of a Mac is all wintel off the shelf.

I don't think that getting volume x86 mobos is going to make that big a change to Apples costs or the huge markup they paste on their products. They've spent years saying that not being beige is worth the extra you pay for a Mac, why change now?

[Sivran]

RIAA claim: Sales are down
True.
RIAA claim: Sales are down due to piracy
False.
Actual Reason: Sales are down due to less product being shipped, a deliberate decision on the part of the RIAA.

El_Phil claimed: Apple is screwing artists.
False.
Truth: RIAA is screwing artists. Apple makes no money off of iTunes, every last cent goes into maintaining and improving the service. The RIAA receives the lion's share of the revenue from iTunes, while Apple bears all the costs.

[El_Phil]

I rarely meet people like you. Can I possibly interest you in a Baghdad timeshare? It's a up and coming area, great potential. You'd be foolish to miss out this chance!

Apple is making shedloads from iTunes, there is no way in hell that their costs are that high. Yes other people are making money out of this and the artists are losing out. But claiming Apple makes nothing off this is ridiculous.