Apple updates, drops price of U2 iPod

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 57
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM


    I get the impression that they would cut their noses off to spite Apple, but then, Microsoft might be willing to give them a major bonus for signing a temporary exclusivity deal.



    It would have to be a LOT of money. If their catalog came out on iTunes, hiow much do you think it would make in the first month alone? It could be anywhere from $25 million to maybe over $50 million.



    What could MS offer them? MS will never get more than a fraction of Apple's users for several years, if ever.
  • Reply 42 of 57
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    It would have to be a LOT of money. If their catalog came out on iTunes, hiow much do you think it would make in the first month alone? It could be anywhere from $25 million to maybe over $50 million.



    $50 million in a month? That's 50 million songs or 5 million albums. I'm sure the numbers would be big, but that seems like an insane number considering it would just be re-releases of existing material. For reference, that would be one out of every six people in the USA buying a beatles song. In one month.
  • Reply 43 of 57
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder


    $50 million in a month? That's 50 million songs or 5 million albums. I'm sure the numbers would be big, but that seems like an insane number considering it would just be re-releases of existing material. For reference, that would be one out of every six people in the USA buying a beatles song. In one month.



    I don't remember the number, but the Beatles compolation that came out on CD a couple of years ago, sold a vast amount of product.



    Apple is selling something like 5 million songs a DAY. That's 150 million songs a month. For the Beatles catalog, I think they could manage 25 to 50 million songs the first month. It would slow down after that of course, but there's likely a huge pent-up demand for this.
  • Reply 44 of 57
    If you find a number, get back to me.



    50 million songs in a month would be a third of the iTunes store's sales. I think that's incredibly unlikely, is there any precedent for that sort of domination?
  • Reply 45 of 57
    maybe it is a little bit off topic, but why have the beatles held out of itunes? who holds the rights to those songs? i thought it was michael jackson who bought them rights?
  • Reply 46 of 57
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder


    If you find a number, get back to me.



    50 million songs in a month would be a third of the iTunes store's sales. I think that's incredibly unlikely, is there any precedent for that sort of domination?



    The Album "1" sold 8 million copies in the first year. That was back in 2000.



    That was a release of just 20 songs, which pretty much had been released 18 years before in compilation. They did over 220 songs altogether.



    Besides I said 25 million to 50 million. I'm not saying they will reach 50 million for certain. It's just at the high end of the range.



    When I looked in Goggle, I got over 66 million hits. even granting a considerable amount of overlap, that's a lot. Who comes second, and by how much?



    The Stones have 33 million.



    Dylan has 30 million.



    Elvis has 22 million.



    I can't think of another who might be that far up there. Try some.



    I think that denotes interest.
  • Reply 47 of 57
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    The Album "1" sold 8 million copies in the first year. That was back in 2000.



    That was a release of just 20 songs, which pretty much had been released 18 years before in compilation. They did over 220 songs altogether.



    Doing the math, that's an average of 13.3 million songs sold per month. 50 million songs in a month is four times that, in a digital format that has far less penetration than CD players.



    I don't doubt that a Beatles release would be a huge seller and break records. I just don't agree with throwing out numbers like 50 million, especially when you look at real world precedent.
  • Reply 48 of 57
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder


    Doing the math, that's an average of 13.3 million songs sold per month. 50 million songs in a month is four times that, in a digital format that has far less penetration than CD players.



    I don't doubt that a Beatles release would be a huge seller and break records. I just don't agree with throwing out numbers like 50 million, especially when you look at real world precedent.



    You're talking double speak. By constantly insisting on the high end figure of 50 million, without giving recognition to the lower figure of 25 million, you make it seem as though I am the one stuck on it, when it's you that is. When someone gives a range, it doesn't mean that either end of the range is as likely as a number somewhere in the middle. It's a Gaussian curve. The further to the extreme, the less likely the occurrence. 50 million is not very likely, but it is not outside of any possibility.



    I do think that a number somewhere between the extremes is certainly POSSIBLE.



    And pent up demand is a large factor here that you are ignoring. This is not a steady state process.



    You can look to album sales, book sales, first weekend movie attendance, and sales of DVD's to see exactly what I mean.



    You can even look at the sales of the iPod itself. When new models come out, particularly during a big sales season, the numbers zoom. They then fall back considerably. Look to this years sales to see that. The same thing will be true next year. Predictions of possibly 18 to 19 million iPods this holiday season, falling to perhaps 9 to 10 million a quarter for the rest of the year.



    The same thing when (and if) the Beatles appear on iTunes. Firstly, both they and Apple will make special offers commemorating the major event. That will sell many songs. Then people will order quite a few of the right away. After a while those numbers will drop to what they will continue to be over the long term, which could be one million, 5 million 10 million, who knows?



    It's why people go crazy to buy the first game console when it first appears, or some major new game that everyone has been waiting for, or some new toy.



    The sales figures are often several times the steady state sales numbers.



    Woodward's new book is selling like hotcakes right now. It's already in its third printing scantly over a week after it was released. Do you think sales will be at that level in a month? I doubt it, even if it remains on the bestseller list for a year.



    The same situation would be true here.
  • Reply 49 of 57
    Fine. I think 25 million in a month is ridiculous as well. Feel better.



    Even with all the numbers you cite, none justify a number that high.



    As I said, the initial numbers for a Beatles release would be very high by download standards. Even if the initial rush of buying is large, which I also agree with.



    Even assuming *half* of the album 1's sales were in the first month, that's 80 million songs sold. 25 million digital downloads in a month? In a format that doesn't have a fraction the consumer penetration that CD players do? That number is incredibly high, there's nothing to back it up.



    Has any artist even done a tenth of that number on iTunes in a month? A hundredth?
  • Reply 50 of 57
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder


    Fine. I think 25 million in a month is ridiculous as well. Feel better.



    Even with all the numbers you cite, none justify a number that high.



    As I said, the initial numbers for a Beatles release would be very high by download standards. Even if the initial rush of buying is large, which I also agree with.



    Even assuming *half* of the album 1's sales were in the first month, that's 80 million songs sold. 25 million digital downloads in a month? In a format that doesn't have a fraction the consumer penetration that CD players do? That number is incredibly high, there's nothing to back it up.



    Has any artist even done a tenth of that number on iTunes in a month? A hundredth?



    I don't have iTunes sales numbers for individual songs sold during any period, though it's possible that such information does exist.



    Considering that there are considered to be over 40 million iPod owners out there right now, and that we can expect that number to rise by at least another ten million in just a another three months, I don't see why you are so adamant about this.



    It would only require half of the iPod owners out there to purchase one song each for the number to reach 25 million. Only a quarter of them would have to buy a song if the people buying them bought two songs apiece.



    I haven't said that it will happen, only that it is possible.



    You can think what you want. We won't know until, and if, it happens anyway.
  • Reply 51 of 57
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    Considering that there are considered to be over 40 million iPod owners out there right now, and that we can expect that number to rise by at least another ten million in just a another three months, I don't see why you are so adamant about this.



    It would only require half of the iPod owners out there to purchase one song each for the number to reach 25 million. Only a quarter of them would have to buy a song if the people buying them bought two songs apiece.



    And do you have any idea how astronomically high HALF of all owners of a player buying content from the same artist, in the same month is? (or even the numbers when you assume people buying multiple tracks) Especially when you consider there are many people who own more than one iPod.



    I think the number of songs versus the number of players sold is a perfect illustration of why your number is way too high.



    Considering there are probably hundreds of millions of CD players in the world, using your logic the "1" album should have sold WAY more than 8 million copies. It just doesn't make any mathematical sense.
  • Reply 52 of 57
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder


    And do you have any idea how astronomically high HALF of all owners of a player buying content from the same artist, in the same month is? (or even the numbers when you assume people buying multiple tracks) Especially when you consider there are many people who own more than one iPod.



    That's equivalent to one person out of twenty buying a ten track album. If the entire Beatles library was released to iTunes at once, I don't see the problem because the rabid fans might just buy them all for some reason.
  • Reply 53 of 57
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM


    If the entire Beatles library was released to iTunes at once, I don't see the problem because the rabid fans might just buy them all for some reason.



    Now I wonder if that market isn't already satisfied. Aren't the hardcore Beatles fans with iPods already listening to tracks imported off their own CDs? Why would they need to buy a DRM file off iTunes? I don't doubt such an announcement would have a major promotional splash with exclusive offers, beyond that, it will need to get gimmicky - including additional tracks, video files, etc.



    I think the biggest potential would be songs licensed to film - say, if "Magical Mystery Tour" ended up with a lot of play in a Reece Witherspoon movie it might sell to the kids.
  • Reply 54 of 57
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by davidzLA


    Now I wonder if that market isn't already satisfied. Aren't the hardcore Beatles fans with iPods already listening to tracks imported off their own CDs? Why would they need to buy a DRM file off iTunes? I don't doubt such an announcement would have a major promotional splash with exclusive offers, beyond that, it will need to get gimmicky - including additional tracks, video files, etc.



    I think the biggest potential would be songs licensed to film - say, if "Magical Mystery Tour" ended up with a lot of play in a Reece Witherspoon movie it might sell to the kids.



    That's probably right. Most Beatles fans have been around for a while, and for years they have had the chance to buy remastered CD versions of every Beatles album. You'd figure that if you like the Beatles so much, you'd prefer to buy the CD with the printed artwork. I just can't see any advantage to owning your favorite artist in a digital download only. I'd much rather get the original CD, rip at the quality i want and enjoy. These are the Beatles we're talking about.
  • Reply 55 of 57
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder


    And do you have any idea how astronomically high HALF of all owners of a player buying content from the same artist, in the same month is? (or even the numbers when you assume people buying multiple tracks) Especially when you consider there are many people who own more than one iPod.



    I think the number of songs versus the number of players sold is a perfect illustration of why your number is way too high.



    Considering there are probably hundreds of millions of CD players in the world, using your logic the "1" album should have sold WAY more than 8 million copies. It just doesn't make any mathematical sense.



    What you haven/t been considering is that the Beatles recorded their albums over a seven year period. Even their re-releases sell extermely well, and quickly.



    Releasing all of their material at once would be a bombshell.



    You have difficulty seeing this.



    Ok, that's fine.
  • Reply 56 of 57
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by davidzLA


    Now I wonder if that market isn't already satisfied. Aren't the hardcore Beatles fans with iPods already listening to tracks imported off their own CDs? Why would they need to buy a DRM file off iTunes? I don't doubt such an announcement would have a major promotional splash with exclusive offers, beyond that, it will need to get gimmicky - including additional tracks, video files, etc.



    I think the biggest potential would be songs licensed to film - say, if "Magical Mystery Tour" ended up with a lot of play in a Reece Witherspoon movie it might sell to the kids.



    They would likely release the special material the Beatles recorded for their fans over the years that is difficult to get today. I have a fair amount of that, and it hasn't been re-released, and was in veery short supply then. Also other sessions tracks that weren't released. When some have been released over the years they went very quickly.



    I think some are underestimating the power the Beatles have, even today.
  • Reply 57 of 57
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by monkeyastronaut


    That's probably right. Most Beatles fans have been around for a while, and for years they have had the chance to buy remastered CD versions of every Beatles album. You'd figure that if you like the Beatles so much, you'd prefer to buy the CD with the printed artwork. I just can't see any advantage to owning your favorite artist in a digital download only. I'd much rather get the original CD, rip at the quality i want and enjoy. These are the Beatles we're talking about.



    There is no such thing as an "original" CD. Original LP, yes.



    They have already announced that they are remastering all of their work for digital download. The bitrate will be lower than the CD, but would likely be far better quality than the rips people have made for themselves from CD's that were never intended to be ripped, in software that is less than professional quality.
Sign In or Register to comment.