iTunes to Leverage .Mac?
Would it not be smart for Apple to leverage .Mac by using iTunes? Here's how it would work: If you spend $200 or more per year on the iTMS, then you get your .Mac subscription for free for that year.
I think it would be an awesome way for Apple to boost both legally downloaded music and .Mac subscriptions.
Any thoughts?
I think it would be an awesome way for Apple to boost both legally downloaded music and .Mac subscriptions.
Any thoughts?
Comments
Apple is already barely scraping by with iTMS. Last I saw, iTMS was actually still *losing* money for Apple. iTMS is not a money maker. Jobs has said that. Schiller has said that. Many others have said that. I have cited quotes explaining that many times here at AI.
Selling music online cannot be profitable for Apple, Napster, etc. because all of the revenue goes straight into the overhead of running the store and out to the record labels and artists. After that, there's no profit remaining.
iTMS's primary purpose today is to push iPods. The iPod is Apple's cash cow.
By hooking in .Mac subscriptions with iTMS sales, Apple would essentially be giving away .Mac for free and, again, at a loss to Apple's coffers. Apple has no reason to do this. Apple has good reason not to do this. Apple gains nothing by giving away "free" .Mac accounts with the purchase of X number of iTMS sales.
Originally posted by Messiahtosh
Would it not be smart for Apple to leverage .Mac by using iTunes? Here's how it would work: If you spend $200 or more per year on the iTMS, then you get your .Mac subscription for free for that year.
I think it would be an awesome way for Apple to boost both legally downloaded music and .Mac subscriptions.
Any thoughts?
After I read this, my first thought was "why would Apple bother?" If Apple cared so much about the number of .Mac users it could just give away memberships with other purchases, such as with new Macs. But where's the profit in doing this for Apple? .Mac was free when it was iTools and that stopped. At best Apple could make some money by selling extra iDisk space, though how many users actually do that? Simply put, what would the profit motive of your plan be?
Moreover, if the iTMS is in business to sell iPods, wouldn't a better plan be to offer some sort of small iPod discount to big spenders on the iTMS? Then Apple still makes a bit of extra money.
What Apple should be doing is hyping .Mac a bit more. .Mac has two killer features for me: 1. bookmark syncing and 2. local iDisk syncing with Panther. This last feature alone is well worth the price of .Mac for someone like me who likes to work on the same files sometimes at home on a tower and other times in the comfort of a coffee shop on a laptop.
BTW, you could just reverse the equation slightly or tie it in in different ways. Apple could offer .Mac subscribers 10 free downloads from the iTMS, and cover that cost with the .Mac subscription fee.
Originally posted by Messiahtosh
My point of this whole idea is that since .Mac was free before, it could basically be again, if you download 200 tracks or whatever. It just ensures a minimum amount of downloads from you to keep .Mac for free. It keeps download numbers looking healthy, that would be the only point.
However...
1. will this really make people buy extra songs? Maybe people who want to skip out on the .Mac fee. But then is Apple actually making any money? The cost of .Mac is the cost of just over 100 songs. Which makes Apple more cash? Also, wouldn't better marketing involve getting people to buy both a plethora of songs AND .Mac?
2. why would Apple want .Mac to be free? if it did, wouldn't they have kept iTools around? I'm still struggling to see what Apple's motivation would be here.
Originally posted by Messiahtosh
To bolster iTunes Music Store's downloading rate.
One more time...where's the profit in doing this? As Brad pointed out, the iTMS is not going to be making money any time soon.
At best download rates go up so Apple can issue a few more self-congratulatory press releases announcing that milestone song x was just sold by some non-offensive artist. But if the Music Store is not making any money, unless these extra downloads result in iPod sales (and there is no reason so say that they will) Apple will not be making more money. And that's what Apple wants to do: make more money.
Plus, I doubt this deal would have broad enough appeal to increase iTMS download rates in any significant way.
Apple should also be adding .mac features to garageband. Digidesign has Rocketnetwork which is a way for Pro musicians to collaborate on projects from afar. Just think if GB 2.0 had it so that if you were a mean Sax player like I am I could cut some licks for you and send it to your project. You need a WAN And some sort timecode in the music. Make it happen Apple.