So a music wholesaler has four customers, and he offers a sweet deal to one of them, while refusing to extend the same deal to the others.
He is then seriously surprised to find out one of his customers is not supporting the marketing his products anymore?
Yep. Apple can sell what they want and offer the sweet spots to whom they want, just like all stores. You can bet the local Borders isn't going to offer "Kill all those homo Jews" a space on their front door table no matter how much the publisher is willing to pay (probably won't care it either).
If anything, Amazon is the guilty party because they probably leveraged their dominance in the overall online market to get the labels to agree to make an exception to the 'street date' rules. and remember those rules are online and BrickMortar stores.
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3
This is not about total music sales. Apple has 70% of all revenue of all online sales.
how about a source for that fact.
Also, a naturally occurring monopoly is NOT illegal. It is only when one gets there through negative means or uses that power to try to gain in a totally different market that there is an issue. This is what happened with Microsoft in the 90s. they had a strong, natural monopoly in the Personal Computer OS realm and tried to gain in the Web browser realm by forcing OEM licensees to only install IE and not anyone else's software or they couldn't have Windows. ANd then made it worse by cutting off access to needed OS details and threatening lawsuits on anyone that reverse engineered for the info.
The music industry never wanted single song downloads to proliferate. They want to sell whole CD's! That is their old and tired and profitable business model. Apple's cut of the cost of each song is just too much.
Besides, why do people mindlessly buy from Apple anyway? I read a recent survey that concluded that Apple's prices were higher than the competition for a select sampling of songs. Buy Amazon!
how about a source for that fact. Does it really surprise you that itunes has 70% of all online music sales with the iPod considering that Apple controls 70% of the mp3 market, especially those who still have DRM'ed music?
Also, a naturally occurring monopoly is NOT illegal. It is only when one gets there through negative means or uses that power to try to gain in a totally different market that there is an issue. This is what happened with Microsoft in the 90s. they had a strong, natural monopoly in the Personal Computer OS realm and tried to gain in the Web browser realm by forcing OEM licensees to only install IE and not anyone else's software or they couldn't have Windows. ANd then made it worse by cutting off access to needed OS details and threatening lawsuits on anyone that reverse engineered for the info.
How about a source? Read the NYT blog article by Brad Stone that was mentioned in the article.
Like I said, a monopoly is not illegal. The abuse of one is. If you read the article and the articles in the past few days regarding Google, you'd see that Apple hasn't done anything wrong except ask for equality from the record labels. Google, however, had been "de-ranking" search results in favor of their own product and doing things like banning Anon sites while taking ad revenues from the church of Scientology to restore search results which benefits Google.
You may know more than me, but how is this the equvialent of MS who controlled almost 95% of all PC's at one time and use that weight to keep a browser and PC monopoly?
What Apple seems to be accused of here is nothing more than standard business tactics. The idea of them setting a price is hilarious considering the RIAA wanted higher prices per song.
Sigh... perhaps reading would be a better option than replying?
Besides, why do people mindlessly buy from Apple anyway? I read a recent survey that concluded that Apple's prices were higher than the competition for a select sampling of songs. Buy Amazon!
Seriously? Give me a break.
No one "mindlessly" buys from Apple. We do it because it is easy, convenient, seamless, and price competitive. Additionally, all Apple files are in the higher quality AAC format. I have bought from Amazon as well (though usually when I have free credit, or a song is free). The experience is not as seamless, and I am sorry, but the price is NOT always cheaper. Amazon doesn't charge .99 for every song anymore.
Sigh... perhaps reading would be a better option than replying?
Wow, that's some serious irony. Maybe you should re-read your own post. There is nothing illegal in a "monopoly" asking for equality. The threat, referred to in the article, was iTunes removing that artist off the iTunes front page headlines. Declining a headline does not equal a monopoly.
This is not about total music sales. Apple has 70% of all revenue of all online music sales. That is bordering on monopoly status just like Google is with search and online ad revenues. It is even worse with Google because they seem to abusing that monopoly status.
Why bring politics to this? Are your political leanings so heavy that you can't manage to bring any sort objectivity into this matter. You're embarrasing yourself. You mention Robin Hood. Do you feel the same about Medicaid & Social Security?
I'm wondering if you're one of those souherns who chanted "Drill, baby, Drill". If so, then you got what you deserved. Instead of thinking about just your immediate self-interests you should get some knowledge about what's really going on and find out who's been destroying your way of life.
Hint: It's both parties but moreso Republicans. If you bring politics into this, you had better know what you're talking about.
70% or revenue? i'd like to see a source as well. and again, this seems to be much more due to lobbying than a real concern over apple's "abusive monopoly" of music sales. and if you must know, i feel exactly the same about medicaid and social security. they are complete disasters (i work in the medical field). however, although some sort of safety net is a necessary evil, it is a FAR cry from the kind of control obama is exerting on so much of the economy. i am not a southerner, nor am i a fan of republicans, just someone with a little common sense. and it's actually hilarious that you say people who want independence from foreign sources of energy deserve the oil spill when obama was the biggest recipient of money from BP and is doing NOTHING about the spill except whining like a _____. and thanks for your concern, but i know exactly what i am talking about thankyouverymuch.
Haveing 24% of the market is not a trust. Besides if you don't believe this administration wouldn't use the law to achieve it's political goals you are grossly out of touch.
It would be one thing if Apple had a hammer lock on digital music but they don't. Not even close. Apple has been successful yes but that has a lot to do with the competition not getting it. The laws purpose is to protect the dumb or out of Touch. In this regard Apple gas done nothing to deserve this investigation.
Dave
Uh-oh, I've been whacked by a stick of political baloney. Smells bad.
According to the article at the top of this thread, Apple has a 69% share of the online music market. Whether this is considered a "trust" or not is irrelevant, it is potentially a source of market power in a definable market. Whether in your mind Apple does or does not "deserve" to be investigated is also irrelevant. These investigations are typically instigated on a complaint basis. The vast majority of the time, they result in no action.
Sigh... perhaps reading would be a better option than replying?
Is that all you got? The main threat from Apple was that they would remove the artist off the main headlines on iTunes. Maybe you didn't read it. This does not equal a monopoly. All Apple asked for was equal treatment.
70% or revenue? i'd like to see a source as well. and again, this seems to be much more due to lobbying than a real concern over apple's "abusive monopoly" of music sales. and if you must know, i feel exactly the same about medicaid and social security. they are complete disasters (i work in the medical field). however, although some sort of safety net is a necessary evil, it is a FAR cry from the kind of control obama is exerting on so much of the economy. i am not a southerner, nor am i a fan of republicans, just someone with a little common sense. and it's actually hilarious that you say people who want independence from foreign sources of energy deserve the oil spill when obama was the biggest recipient of money from BP and is doing NOTHING about the spill except whining like a _____. and thanks for your concern, but i know exactly what i am talking about thankyouverymuch.
Again read the actual article itself instead of just replying. Apple control ~70% of all online music sales revenues. Exactly how do you think they passed Walmart in total US music sales when CDs are still abundant?
BTW, if you feel the sale way about SS and Medicaid, then your parents would have ended up broke (if you're a baby boomer onwards) and the Great Depression would have lasted for another 30 years which would have affted even WWII. If you don't know why FDR was considered so great, then you're missing the point.
The secret to greatness of any system is not capitalism nor socialism but what exists in-between. If you haven't leaned that from the Wall Street crisis then you are naive. I don't mean to offend you.
Most times, taking the middle road is the best path.
Is that all you got? The main threat from Apple was that they would remove the artist off the main headlines on iTunes. Maybe you didn't read it. This does not equal a monopoly. All Apple asked for was equal treatment.
Always a lot of confusion over the basic concepts when it comes to antitrust. It's not about monopoly, a state which rarely exists. If Apple has market power in a defined market (not a proven fact, but possible), and if they use that market power to disadvantage competitors (also not proven, but possible), then they may have violated the antitrust laws. In this case, if it can be shown that they have penalized a record label for dealing with a competitor then they might be in for a hearty hand-slap and a stern warning not to do it again. Again, if, if, if.
Again read the actual article itself instead of just replying. Apple control ~70% of all online music sales revenues. Exactly how do you think they passed Walmart in total US music sales when CDs are still abundant?
BTW, if you feel the sale way about SS and Medicaid, then your parents would have ended up broke (if you're a baby boomer onwards) and the Great Depression would have lasted for another 30 years which would have affted even WWII. If you don't know why FDR was considered so great, then you're missing the point.
The secret to greatness of any system is not capitalism nor socialism but what exists in-between. If you haven't leaned that from the Wall Street crisis then you are naive. I don't mean to offend you.
Most times, taking the middle road is the best path.
no offense taken, looks like we actually agree more than we disagree
Apple control ~70% of all online music sales revenues. Exactly how do you think they passed Walmart in total US music sales when CDs are still abundant?
By offering a great service at a great price. Is there any other way?
What a bunch of Jags. Ignore CitiBank, Ignore AI-friggin G and go after a friggin Music Store, that has delivered product to consumers for less money than the good old boy network in Hollywood. These pension driven frigtards should be investigated for their over the top incompetence, waste of taxpayer dollars and amazing ability to I-FRIG-NORE THE REAL MONOPOLIES IN THE BANKING, UNION AND OTHER sectors of our economy. My guess, they are tired of watching Porn at the office and decided to try for a meet up with Jobs.
There are so many problems with big businesses, and Apple is not one of them. Everyone associated with Apple is making good money, not just a few insiders, they are working on being eco-friendly, make great products. And they actually make stuff that employs people, they are creative etc.
Then you have the banks, the oil companies both of which I think are highly problematic in so many ways, too much to discuss here.
Then there is Google a nightmare of invasion of privacy happening, but the sh!t has yet to hit the fan, and Amazon is no lap dog either, nor is the music industry itself - their history of all sorts of corpses of exploitation and drug addictions on the side of their roads travelled.
Why the Fk investigating Apple, wasting our tax dollars big time. The government should be in crisis mode trying to solve that brewing international ecological assault massively growing out of control in the Gulf. The distractions of investigating reasonably 'good citizen companies' is just ludicrous.
What the ~
Hello Mr Obama, the way you run things, or let things run, is a huge disappointment. Come to think of it, you should probably be recalled like that Governor in CA some years ago....
What a bunch of Jags. Ignore CitiBank, Ignore AI-friggin G and go after a friggin Music Store, that has delivered product to consumers for less money than the good old boy network in Hollywood. These pension driven frigtards should be investigated for their over the top incompetence, waste of taxpayer dollars and amazing ability to I-FRIG-NORE THE REAL MONOPOLIES IN THE BANKING, UNION AND OTHER sectors of our economy. My guess, they are tired of watching Porn at the office and decided to try for a meet up with Jobs.
Note that that milestone occurred over two years ago...
I don't mean offense but this is not the point. I don't think that Apple has a monopolistic behavior. They do, however, have a monopoly over online music. This is important. Itay be the difference between getting into a lawsuit like MS. iTunes has to actually prevent competition.
My intention wasn't to bring politics into it but those that do (maybe you) had better know US history and understand that there is a difference between being a monopoly and the abuse of a monopoly. Only one of those things are illegal.
Comments
So a music wholesaler has four customers, and he offers a sweet deal to one of them, while refusing to extend the same deal to the others.
He is then seriously surprised to find out one of his customers is not supporting the marketing his products anymore?
Yep. Apple can sell what they want and offer the sweet spots to whom they want, just like all stores. You can bet the local Borders isn't going to offer "Kill all those homo Jews" a space on their front door table no matter how much the publisher is willing to pay (probably won't care it either).
If anything, Amazon is the guilty party because they probably leveraged their dominance in the overall online market to get the labels to agree to make an exception to the 'street date' rules. and remember those rules are online and BrickMortar stores.
This is not about total music sales. Apple has 70% of all revenue of all online sales.
how about a source for that fact.
Also, a naturally occurring monopoly is NOT illegal. It is only when one gets there through negative means or uses that power to try to gain in a totally different market that there is an issue. This is what happened with Microsoft in the 90s. they had a strong, natural monopoly in the Personal Computer OS realm and tried to gain in the Web browser realm by forcing OEM licensees to only install IE and not anyone else's software or they couldn't have Windows. ANd then made it worse by cutting off access to needed OS details and threatening lawsuits on anyone that reverse engineered for the info.
Besides, why do people mindlessly buy from Apple anyway? I read a recent survey that concluded that Apple's prices were higher than the competition for a select sampling of songs. Buy Amazon!
how about a source for that fact. Does it really surprise you that itunes has 70% of all online music sales with the iPod considering that Apple controls 70% of the mp3 market, especially those who still have DRM'ed music?
Also, a naturally occurring monopoly is NOT illegal. It is only when one gets there through negative means or uses that power to try to gain in a totally different market that there is an issue. This is what happened with Microsoft in the 90s. they had a strong, natural monopoly in the Personal Computer OS realm and tried to gain in the Web browser realm by forcing OEM licensees to only install IE and not anyone else's software or they couldn't have Windows. ANd then made it worse by cutting off access to needed OS details and threatening lawsuits on anyone that reverse engineered for the info.
How about a source? Read the NYT blog article by Brad Stone that was mentioned in the article.
Like I said, a monopoly is not illegal. The abuse of one is. If you read the article and the articles in the past few days regarding Google, you'd see that Apple hasn't done anything wrong except ask for equality from the record labels. Google, however, had been "de-ranking" search results in favor of their own product and doing things like banning Anon sites while taking ad revenues from the church of Scientology to restore search results which benefits Google.
You may know more than me, but how is this the equvialent of MS who controlled almost 95% of all PC's at one time and use that weight to keep a browser and PC monopoly?
What Apple seems to be accused of here is nothing more than standard business tactics. The idea of them setting a price is hilarious considering the RIAA wanted higher prices per song.
Sigh... perhaps reading would be a better option than replying?
Besides, why do people mindlessly buy from Apple anyway? I read a recent survey that concluded that Apple's prices were higher than the competition for a select sampling of songs. Buy Amazon!
Seriously? Give me a break.
No one "mindlessly" buys from Apple. We do it because it is easy, convenient, seamless, and price competitive. Additionally, all Apple files are in the higher quality AAC format. I have bought from Amazon as well (though usually when I have free credit, or a song is free). The experience is not as seamless, and I am sorry, but the price is NOT always cheaper. Amazon doesn't charge .99 for every song anymore.
Sigh... perhaps reading would be a better option than replying?
Wow, that's some serious irony. Maybe you should re-read your own post. There is nothing illegal in a "monopoly" asking for equality. The threat, referred to in the article, was iTunes removing that artist off the iTunes front page headlines. Declining a headline does not equal a monopoly.
This is not about total music sales. Apple has 70% of all revenue of all online music sales. That is bordering on monopoly status just like Google is with search and online ad revenues. It is even worse with Google because they seem to abusing that monopoly status.
Why bring politics to this? Are your political leanings so heavy that you can't manage to bring any sort objectivity into this matter. You're embarrasing yourself. You mention Robin Hood. Do you feel the same about Medicaid & Social Security?
I'm wondering if you're one of those souherns who chanted "Drill, baby, Drill". If so, then you got what you deserved. Instead of thinking about just your immediate self-interests you should get some knowledge about what's really going on and find out who's been destroying your way of life.
Hint: It's both parties but moreso Republicans. If you bring politics into this, you had better know what you're talking about.
70% or revenue? i'd like to see a source as well. and again, this seems to be much more due to lobbying than a real concern over apple's "abusive monopoly" of music sales. and if you must know, i feel exactly the same about medicaid and social security. they are complete disasters (i work in the medical field). however, although some sort of safety net is a necessary evil, it is a FAR cry from the kind of control obama is exerting on so much of the economy. i am not a southerner, nor am i a fan of republicans, just someone with a little common sense. and it's actually hilarious that you say people who want independence from foreign sources of energy deserve the oil spill when obama was the biggest recipient of money from BP and is doing NOTHING about the spill except whining like a _____. and thanks for your concern, but i know exactly what i am talking about thankyouverymuch.
Haveing 24% of the market is not a trust. Besides if you don't believe this administration wouldn't use the law to achieve it's political goals you are grossly out of touch.
It would be one thing if Apple had a hammer lock on digital music but they don't. Not even close. Apple has been successful yes but that has a lot to do with the competition not getting it. The laws purpose is to protect the dumb or out of Touch. In this regard Apple gas done nothing to deserve this investigation.
Dave
Uh-oh, I've been whacked by a stick of political baloney. Smells bad.
According to the article at the top of this thread, Apple has a 69% share of the online music market. Whether this is considered a "trust" or not is irrelevant, it is potentially a source of market power in a definable market. Whether in your mind Apple does or does not "deserve" to be investigated is also irrelevant. These investigations are typically instigated on a complaint basis. The vast majority of the time, they result in no action.
Sigh... perhaps reading would be a better option than replying?
Is that all you got? The main threat from Apple was that they would remove the artist off the main headlines on iTunes. Maybe you didn't read it. This does not equal a monopoly. All Apple asked for was equal treatment.
70% or revenue? i'd like to see a source as well. and again, this seems to be much more due to lobbying than a real concern over apple's "abusive monopoly" of music sales. and if you must know, i feel exactly the same about medicaid and social security. they are complete disasters (i work in the medical field). however, although some sort of safety net is a necessary evil, it is a FAR cry from the kind of control obama is exerting on so much of the economy. i am not a southerner, nor am i a fan of republicans, just someone with a little common sense. and it's actually hilarious that you say people who want independence from foreign sources of energy deserve the oil spill when obama was the biggest recipient of money from BP and is doing NOTHING about the spill except whining like a _____. and thanks for your concern, but i know exactly what i am talking about thankyouverymuch.
Again read the actual article itself instead of just replying. Apple control ~70% of all online music sales revenues. Exactly how do you think they passed Walmart in total US music sales when CDs are still abundant?
BTW, if you feel the sale way about SS and Medicaid, then your parents would have ended up broke (if you're a baby boomer onwards) and the Great Depression would have lasted for another 30 years which would have affted even WWII. If you don't know why FDR was considered so great, then you're missing the point.
The secret to greatness of any system is not capitalism nor socialism but what exists in-between. If you haven't leaned that from the Wall Street crisis then you are naive. I don't mean to offend you.
Most times, taking the middle road is the best path.
Is that all you got? The main threat from Apple was that they would remove the artist off the main headlines on iTunes. Maybe you didn't read it. This does not equal a monopoly. All Apple asked for was equal treatment.
Always a lot of confusion over the basic concepts when it comes to antitrust. It's not about monopoly, a state which rarely exists. If Apple has market power in a defined market (not a proven fact, but possible), and if they use that market power to disadvantage competitors (also not proven, but possible), then they may have violated the antitrust laws. In this case, if it can be shown that they have penalized a record label for dealing with a competitor then they might be in for a hearty hand-slap and a stern warning not to do it again. Again, if, if, if.
Again read the actual article itself instead of just replying. Apple control ~70% of all online music sales revenues. Exactly how do you think they passed Walmart in total US music sales when CDs are still abundant?
BTW, if you feel the sale way about SS and Medicaid, then your parents would have ended up broke (if you're a baby boomer onwards) and the Great Depression would have lasted for another 30 years which would have affted even WWII. If you don't know why FDR was considered so great, then you're missing the point.
The secret to greatness of any system is not capitalism nor socialism but what exists in-between. If you haven't leaned that from the Wall Street crisis then you are naive. I don't mean to offend you.
Most times, taking the middle road is the best path.
no offense taken, looks like we actually agree more than we disagree
Apple control ~70% of all online music sales revenues. Exactly how do you think they passed Walmart in total US music sales when CDs are still abundant?
By offering a great service at a great price. Is there any other way?
Here you go:
iTunes passes Wal-Mart as top U.S. music retailer
Note that that milestone occurred over two years ago...
Then you have the banks, the oil companies both of which I think are highly problematic in so many ways, too much to discuss here.
Then there is Google a nightmare of invasion of privacy happening, but the sh!t has yet to hit the fan, and Amazon is no lap dog either, nor is the music industry itself - their history of all sorts of corpses of exploitation and drug addictions on the side of their roads travelled.
Why the Fk investigating Apple, wasting our tax dollars big time. The government should be in crisis mode trying to solve that brewing international ecological assault massively growing out of control in the Gulf. The distractions of investigating reasonably 'good citizen companies' is just ludicrous.
What the ~
Hello Mr Obama, the way you run things, or let things run, is a huge disappointment. Come to think of it, you should probably be recalled like that Governor in CA some years ago....
What a bunch of Jags. Ignore CitiBank, Ignore AI-friggin G and go after a friggin Music Store, that has delivered product to consumers for less money than the good old boy network in Hollywood. These pension driven frigtards should be investigated for their over the top incompetence, waste of taxpayer dollars and amazing ability to I-FRIG-NORE THE REAL MONOPOLIES IN THE BANKING, UNION AND OTHER sectors of our economy. My guess, they are tired of watching Porn at the office and decided to try for a meet up with Jobs.
funny
agree with much of your post...
By offering a great service at a great price. Is there any other way?
Here you go:
iTunes passes Wal-Mart as top U.S. music retailer
Note that that milestone occurred over two years ago...
I don't mean offense but this is not the point. I don't think that Apple has a monopolistic behavior. They do, however, have a monopoly over online music. This is important. Itay be the difference between getting into a lawsuit like MS. iTunes has to actually prevent competition.
. If you bring politics into this, you had better know what you're talking about.
You might want to do the same.
You might want to do the same.
My intention wasn't to bring politics into it but those that do (maybe you) had better know US history and understand that there is a difference between being a monopoly and the abuse of a monopoly. Only one of those things are illegal.