Originally Posted by charlituna
minor correction. At the time that the advance sales existed (apparently Amazon recently dropped that as a requirement in the program) it was before ANYONE else could sell the item. Online or Brick and Mortar.
Thank you for the correction. Seems anti-competitive to me, leveraging Amazon's large CD sales to cut out the competition.
Originally Posted by Tulkas
...The restructuring Amazon proposed eliminated the advanced access for some songs (hence, it being 'just a sale'). The original Billboard article reported that Apple still pressured the labels not take part.
--From the Billboard article--
---------------------".....When Amazon first launched the Daily Deal in June 2008, its primary aim was to drive more customer traffic to the online retail giant's MP3 store. "The labels paid nothing for being included in that privilege, nor were they asked," a major-label head of sales says.
But in mid-2009, the executive says, "that promotion morphed into something where the labels make arrangements to provide an exclusive selling window with Amazon for a big release expected to do a lot of business on street date."
In exchange for a Daily Deal promotion on a new album, Amazon has been asking labels to provide it with a one-day exclusive before street date and such digital marketing support as a banner ad on an artist's MySpace page and messages on label and artist Web sites and social network feeds.
"When that happened," the executive says, "iTunes said, 'Enough of that shit.' "
Sources say that iTunes representatives have been urging labels to rethink their participation in the Amazon promotion and that they have backed up those warnings by withdrawing marketing support for certain releases featured as Daily Deals......
To help labels sidestep iTunes' objections, Amazon has been fine-tuning its Daily Deal pitch on new titles, agreeing, for instance, to forgo the one-day exclusive window on certain ones. But executives familiar with the situation say iTunes has continued to voice its displeasure with other aspects of the promotion, such as label marketing support."
So in 2008 the Daily Deal didn't have the 1 day exclusive and no grumbling from Apple mentioned in the article.
In 2009, the Amazon one day exclusive was introduced that included "digital marketing support as a banner ad on an artist's MySpace page and messages on label and artist Web sites and social network feeds."
That's when Apple objected and said they would pull their promotions and marketing from the iTunes Store, which is more than reasonable. Look at the numbers sold by Amazon on the Daily Deal.(re: Mariah Carey's "Memoirs of an Imperfect Angel" U.S. sales of 168,000 units -Vampire Weekend's "Contra," U.S. sales of 124,000)
Soooooo, not only was Amazon getting a one day exclusive the Labels were to provide free promotion on their websites and the artists were to do the same.
Finally, the article states Apple is "voicing their displeasure"
even with the Daily Deal sans the exclusive, but it doesn't say Apple is pulling their marketing / promotions over these deals, even though Apple would be correct in pulling marketing / promotion over this deal also.
I'm so tired of everyone claiming Apple wields so much power. Where the heck was the power when Amazon got DRM free music long before Apple (re: and not a peep from Apple)? Where the heck was all this power when the Labels forced Apple to sell it's DRM free music at a higher rate than Amazon? Where the heck was all this power when the Labels forced Apple into variable rate pricing?
The truth of the matter is that Apple is under attack not only by the competition but by the Labels and they finally said,"Enough of that %#(!
Originally Posted by Tulkas
I expect Apple to compete. I don't expect them to interfere with the business and trade of other companies. I don't expect MS to do it, Walmart to do it nor Apple to do it.
Apple is not interfering, they are only holding off providing free marketing and promotion, which costs money, since Amazon's anti-competitive behavior limits Apple's sales.
Originally Posted by Stevie
That is beside the point. The point has nothing to do with Apple selling its dev tools.
apple is saying that if a dev wants to sell a title at the iStore, it may not be written in a manner which will allow it to be sold elsewhere. Instead, it must be written in a manner that gives Apple an exclusive title.
Perhaps the reason they are doing this is to use their app market power in order to disadvantage other platforms, and other handset makers.
I think that is what is being looked into.
You are wrong. Developers are free to write their apps for any other platform, Apple in no way is telling developers that apps for their store are an exclusive.
Maybe someone should write a cross compiler based on Apple's tools, APIs and SDKs, if this is even possible, I'm not a programmer. That way a developer could write the app in C, C++, objC for Apple then just cross compile to other OSes.