Actually apple reports $0.07 of revenue per song, or at least they did back in 2005 when I last looked. The other $.92 cents goes to the record company.
That's a hell of alot of money going to the record company for free distribution, free advertising, and not to mention exposure to a market of people who are willing to buy individual songs, where they wouldn't have bought the whole album.
They are only crying about it because they have a giant "consumer advocate" they have to get by every time they want to mess with price. Apple's interest is in keeping people very happy buying songs for the ipod, and they will fight tooth and nail for anything that might make the ipod look less desirable. That has the nice side effect of Apple being a big price and availability protector.
They also can't raise their CD prices very much because retailers are forced by extension to keep pricing near the sum of the itunes pricing.
The music companies secretly love digital distribution... this about it. No CD pressing, no literature, no packing, no shipping, no shelf space, no unsold lots ( this happens at the wholesale level when an artist's album is anticipated to be more successful than it turned out to be ) , no inventory, no backorders, no merchandise returns.
The only thing they hate, is that they have to go looking for artists with more talent. They can't have too many more artists with only one hit song, because they're no onger selling 10 songs on the success of 1. It's more like 1 or 2 sales per hit song now.
It was ABC that was the black sheep. most years, NBC did fine.
But weren't they the first and only company to back out of the itunes deal? It makes no since to me why they would go against the grain. I know it sometimes good to throw a stone in the pond to make a wave, but sounds like to me and from what I have read NBC was just going to piss a lot of folks off and at the same time have the limelight shine on the the other company. It kind of a win for Apple and for ABC and the lot the way I see it. Maybe I just don't get it. Not afraid to admit it too.
Just to note.. apple did not make a single cent on itunes content.. they are only focus on their products which is the ipods.
to be honest, there is some truth to what NBC is saying about how apple only wants to promote its ipod through itunes and minimize the studio's profit. NBC just went the wrong way by going public.
I agree. But, with out the invention of the iPod (Thanks Steve) where would any of this/us be? Granted NBC was looking at their investment and Apple gave them a audience to promote their shows and that of whoever wanted to join the band. I'm all for competition, but if a model works as good as Apples, perhaps not upsetting the giant is a good idea until you have a better model. I give it up to NBC for making waves but maybe the wave was a little to big? One more thing...sorry nothing personal just on a rant...what is easier? iTunes + iPod seamless integration or other iPod want-to-bes and...oh you get the picture. (No pun intended)
But weren't they the first and only company to back out of the itunes deal? It makes no since to me why they would go against the grain. I know it sometimes good to throw a stone in the pond to make a wave, but sounds like to me and from what I have read NBC was just going to piss a lot of folks off and at the same time have the limelight shine on the the other company. It kind of a win for Apple and for ABC and the lot the way I see it. Maybe I just don't get it. Not afraid to admit it too.
This is all so complex. We look at whatever any company that hurts apple does, as being wrong, or stupid.
I'm not saying that I agree, from our perspective, but from theirs, it's clearly different. they want to protect their business. They don't, and shouldn't, care about how that affects Apple.
It's like when auto workers go on strike. The pick one auto company to strike against. The results of that strike will then affect the entire industry.
Here, it's only Apple, but many "unions" so to speak. Every content company will look at the result from this, and then will decide what to do next.
If NBC gets concessions, they will expect, and likely get, them too.
Meanwhile, they are all trying alternative distribution methods.
This is all so complex. We look at whatever any company that hurts apple does, as being wrong, or stupid.
I'm not saying that I agree, from our perspective, but from theirs, it's clearly different. they want to protect their business. They don't, and shouldn't, care about how that affects Apple.
It's like when auto workers go on strike. The pick one auto company to strike against. The results of that strike will then affect the entire industry.
Here, it's only Apple, but many "unions" so to speak. Every content company will look at the result from this, and then will decide what to do next.
If NBC gets concessions, they will expect, and likely get, them too.
Meanwhile, they are all trying alternative distribution methods.
I agree. But, with out the invention of the iPod (Thanks Steve) where would any of this/us be? Granted NBC was looking at their investment and Apple gave them a audience to promote their shows and that of whoever wanted to join the band. I'm all for competition, but if a model works as good as Apples, perhaps not upsetting the giant is a good idea until you have a better model. I give it up to NBC for making waves but maybe the wave was a little to big? One more thing...sorry nothing personal just on a rant...what is easier? iTunes + iPod seamless integration or other iPod want-to-bes and...oh you get the picture. (No pun intended)
Thanks for the opinion. Keep'em coming.
I've said it before. The studios, and Tv companies, do not get significant revenue, or profits, from the Tv shows, and movies, sold on iTunes, or anywhere else.
This is what's called a nescient industry. It's just started up. The amount of money that's changed hands is just a small percentage of their total business. What they are trying to avoid, is what's happening to the music industry.
There, CD sales are dropping like a stone. Internet sales are ramping up well, but not fast enough to make up for it. 23% drop over last holiday season! They don't want Apple to become the only major distributer.
You can see how they are now offering DRM-free songs, but except for EMI, not on iTunes. They don't seem to have any pricing advantage by going with Amazon, but they want a counterweight to Apple.
One of the big disappointments of Macworld, was the lack of an announcement about bringing those companies aboard. jobs has missed his date for having at least 50% of songs on iTunes DRM-free.
Comments
Actually apple reports $0.07 of revenue per song, or at least they did back in 2005 when I last looked. The other $.92 cents goes to the record company.
That's a hell of alot of money going to the record company for free distribution, free advertising, and not to mention exposure to a market of people who are willing to buy individual songs, where they wouldn't have bought the whole album.
They are only crying about it because they have a giant "consumer advocate" they have to get by every time they want to mess with price. Apple's interest is in keeping people very happy buying songs for the ipod, and they will fight tooth and nail for anything that might make the ipod look less desirable. That has the nice side effect of Apple being a big price and availability protector.
They also can't raise their CD prices very much because retailers are forced by extension to keep pricing near the sum of the itunes pricing.
The music companies secretly love digital distribution... this about it. No CD pressing, no literature, no packing, no shipping, no shelf space, no unsold lots ( this happens at the wholesale level when an artist's album is anticipated to be more successful than it turned out to be ) , no inventory, no backorders, no merchandise returns.
The only thing they hate, is that they have to go looking for artists with more talent. They can't have too many more artists with only one hit song, because they're no onger selling 10 songs on the success of 1. It's more like 1 or 2 sales per hit song now.
Is that such a bad thing?
Exactly, you get the point. I totally agree
It was ABC that was the black sheep. most years, NBC did fine.
But weren't they the first and only company to back out of the itunes deal? It makes no since to me why they would go against the grain. I know it sometimes good to throw a stone in the pond to make a wave, but sounds like to me and from what I have read NBC was just going to piss a lot of folks off and at the same time have the limelight shine on the the other company. It kind of a win for Apple and for ABC and the lot the way I see it. Maybe I just don't get it. Not afraid to admit it too.
Just to note.. apple did not make a single cent on itunes content.. they are only focus on their products which is the ipods.
to be honest, there is some truth to what NBC is saying about how apple only wants to promote its ipod through itunes and minimize the studio's profit. NBC just went the wrong way by going public.
I agree. But, with out the invention of the iPod (Thanks Steve) where would any of this/us be? Granted NBC was looking at their investment and Apple gave them a audience to promote their shows and that of whoever wanted to join the band. I'm all for competition, but if a model works as good as Apples, perhaps not upsetting the giant is a good idea until you have a better model. I give it up to NBC for making waves but maybe the wave was a little to big? One more thing...sorry nothing personal just on a rant...what is easier? iTunes + iPod seamless integration or other iPod want-to-bes and...oh you get the picture. (No pun intended)
Thanks for the opinion. Keep'em coming.
But weren't they the first and only company to back out of the itunes deal? It makes no since to me why they would go against the grain. I know it sometimes good to throw a stone in the pond to make a wave, but sounds like to me and from what I have read NBC was just going to piss a lot of folks off and at the same time have the limelight shine on the the other company. It kind of a win for Apple and for ABC and the lot the way I see it. Maybe I just don't get it. Not afraid to admit it too.
This is all so complex. We look at whatever any company that hurts apple does, as being wrong, or stupid.
I'm not saying that I agree, from our perspective, but from theirs, it's clearly different. they want to protect their business. They don't, and shouldn't, care about how that affects Apple.
It's like when auto workers go on strike. The pick one auto company to strike against. The results of that strike will then affect the entire industry.
Here, it's only Apple, but many "unions" so to speak. Every content company will look at the result from this, and then will decide what to do next.
If NBC gets concessions, they will expect, and likely get, them too.
Meanwhile, they are all trying alternative distribution methods.
This is all so complex. We look at whatever any company that hurts apple does, as being wrong, or stupid.
I'm not saying that I agree, from our perspective, but from theirs, it's clearly different. they want to protect their business. They don't, and shouldn't, care about how that affects Apple.
It's like when auto workers go on strike. The pick one auto company to strike against. The results of that strike will then affect the entire industry.
Here, it's only Apple, but many "unions" so to speak. Every content company will look at the result from this, and then will decide what to do next.
If NBC gets concessions, they will expect, and likely get, them too.
Meanwhile, they are all trying alternative distribution methods.
Nice way of putting it.
I agree. But, with out the invention of the iPod (Thanks Steve) where would any of this/us be? Granted NBC was looking at their investment and Apple gave them a audience to promote their shows and that of whoever wanted to join the band. I'm all for competition, but if a model works as good as Apples, perhaps not upsetting the giant is a good idea until you have a better model. I give it up to NBC for making waves but maybe the wave was a little to big? One more thing...sorry nothing personal just on a rant...what is easier? iTunes + iPod seamless integration or other iPod want-to-bes and...oh you get the picture. (No pun intended)
Thanks for the opinion. Keep'em coming.
I've said it before. The studios, and Tv companies, do not get significant revenue, or profits, from the Tv shows, and movies, sold on iTunes, or anywhere else.
This is what's called a nescient industry. It's just started up. The amount of money that's changed hands is just a small percentage of their total business. What they are trying to avoid, is what's happening to the music industry.
There, CD sales are dropping like a stone. Internet sales are ramping up well, but not fast enough to make up for it. 23% drop over last holiday season! They don't want Apple to become the only major distributer.
You can see how they are now offering DRM-free songs, but except for EMI, not on iTunes. They don't seem to have any pricing advantage by going with Amazon, but they want a counterweight to Apple.
One of the big disappointments of Macworld, was the lack of an announcement about bringing those companies aboard. jobs has missed his date for having at least 50% of songs on iTunes DRM-free.