Universal, Sony to Launch New Services

If I know my large corporations correctly, they probably were planning it then. It took this long for the press release just to get through the legal dept.

The retailers ake the hit. By the way the recording fee doesn't go away, just the replication costs

where does everyone shop that charge an average of $18 for a CD?

The average CD sells for between $13 and $15.

I like the idea I just think $10 is still too much.

I just cannot get out of my head that they can change $8 for a cassette that cost them twice as much to produce but feel that $10 to allow us to download is fair.

$18 is a rip
$15 is a rip
$10 is a rip to allow us to just download it.

If they can sell a cassette for $8 and still make a profit on an item that costs twice as much to produce then why should we be thrilled to download a CD for $10.

Hell - they should be selling CD's in the store for $7 - less than cassettes as it is cheper for them to produce!

If they can make a profit selling cassetees in the store for $8 then we should be able to download them for $5 and singles are ok at $1.

said by rds24a:

---

If I know my large corporations correctly, they probably were planning it then. It took this long for the press release just to get through the legal dept.

---

Naww, that might true for any other corruptoration but not the RIAA. You give them way too much credit.

Everyone gets a percentage after distribution and production costs. SO everyone will take a slightly lower cut.

Now what I would LOVE to see is a comparison between cassette sales and CD's along the same format.

I would use it to...

But i dont see how the record label is going to make MORE money... We all know it costs $1 or less to manufacture a physical CD and the sell it for $16-17. Now they will produce a digital song file for you to download. Sure it will cost next to nothing for each song but now they are getting $1 for the song instead of $16 for the same song on a cd. $15 revenue vs. 99 cent revenue...

not to mention - now we will have professionally encoded files to trade on the P2P networks. pay $1 for it or get it for nothing? be honest now...

Have to agree with you on that. Doesn't sound like this will work, especially at $1 a song... Nice try though
Especially when I can go buy a used CD in good condition for $8.99. Plus, what if a CD I want has more than 15 songs on it. ie: Red Hot Chili Peppers Blood Sugar Sex Magic. It's going to cost me more to download it than actually go to the store and buy it... sorry but that doesn't make sense
[text was edited by author 2002-06-13 12:55:04]

I understand what your saying but, I still like the idea of being able to download the two or three songs that I like from and album for about three bucks rather than pay ten to download the entire album or fifteen to eighteen to buy it in a store. I’m not basing my decision on the record companies overall expenses; I’m basing it on what is cost effective for me. Sure I’d like to pay less if it were possible but in the end I’ll get legitimate copies of the songs that I want to listen to for .99 cents each plus the cost of a blank cdr. Im not including the cost of a burner or my internet connection because i didnt purchase them for the express purpose of using this service.

right - at 1 dollar a song its a good deal for us (the consumer) IMHO

what i question is the viability of this business model for the record label and who will the blame fall upon if it fails? the P2P networks no doubt... then the RIAA will want further federal funding to recoup the losses caused by the failed business venture and more stringent piracy policing. id love to buy songs for a dollar - but i can picture the whole cycle starting all over again...

Edit: Yay! My avatar is up!
[text was edited by author 2002-06-13 12:28:40]

Why not, I pay a dollar to get the song, throw it on my MD player and I immediately have any new song I want. I have no issues with paying a dollar for the song, after all someone did sing it and its a lot better than wasting bandwidth on P2P. I don't think sony is primarily doing this to make money, rather to sound out its customers and try and offset music on P2P.

I've never much been into ripping MP3s or P2P, but I do use my CD-burner (PC based) extensively to make compilation CDs or in the case of my latest project, recording a concert DVD onto CD since they didn't release a CD audio of the show.

I find all this rather fun and enjoyable, so the time expenditure is no big deal for me. I personally have a huge stash of blank cases, and if you look around you can often times get them extremely cheap if you have to purchase them.

I buy CDRs in spindles and use them for audio and data, so no biggie there either. As for the internet connection, that will be there regardless. Setting d/l caps aside for the moment, downloading the tracks wouldn't bother me at all.

I would be a bit miffed on the album art and lyrics etc. with this method, but overall I think it's a pretty decent deal considering the alternatives of some BS massive crack down on home recording. They will in time lay off it if they can make $$ catering to your wants.

K.

I wouldn't like the $10 a month idea, cause some months there's music I like, and some there's not. In a dry month, I'd still have to pay the $10? I doubt you'd get a per-month fee without a contract...but maybe.
I think a $1 per song is GREAT. I can make my own CD mixes for about the same cost as a store-bought CD, without the hassle of dealing with the stupid mall, without having to get off my laaaazy ass, and without having to buy multiple albums to get all the songs I want.
AND I personally am not a big fan of the P2P apps. I know how to use them, and have checked them out, but it rubs my ethic the wrong way...and it's a PITA.
I like this model and I hope it works. Sign me up!
KM

I agree that this is a good beginning to what must happen... because it is gonna continue to pummel their face if they dont jump on the bandwagon.

Assuming that the quality is great and users can play the media however they please.... it still aint gonna do squat.

Sony has to compete with p2p networks. How is $1 a song worth people's time? Now, if you can cut your "looking and waiting" time to nothing by going on Sony's site, then they may have something. But too bad $1 doesn't offset the time of looking through p2p proggies. Maybe when you can download an album for $3-$5 of perfect quality, then they will notice a surge in usage.

Also, of course they are gonna make money on this deal. They outsource bandwidth to Amazon, etc. Amazon takes less of a distribution fee because of all the hits their website is getting (I aint holding my breath on how fast this is gonna catch on). Sony uploads songs to other servers and cashes the $10 checks... My guess is that they already pay for the bandwidth to upload such files... basically they are left with no costs of their own and they just give other people a slice of the pie for all the legwork. They are probably not gonna make as much money off of a downloaded album as they will a cd for nearly twice the cost... but that doesn't mean they aren't still making a profit.

When the prices of albums at the store are $7-$9 and you can download the albums through the "proper" means for $3-$5 then they will cut down on p2p file sharing... they will cut down on all the bitching that goes on here... they will definitely sell more albums (whether or not that translates to more profit is a guess)... they will improve their reputation so that their other products are not affected (some users refuse to purchase sony products because of their copyrighted celiene dion cd)...

enough is enough and this is too little too late Sony. I have a counter offer... how about I continue to not buy cd's until they reach the price I think they are worth ($1 isn't the $.20-$.33 I propose). You have to realize that you and your price colluding buddies have totally pissed off a lot of people and you have to go completely out of your way to win us back... $1 a song and $10 an album, when we do your work for you, is an insult.

said by digiphreak:

---

heres where the $ from a CD purchase goes:
* Retailer: $5, * Record label: $4.92, * Distributor: $2.40, * Giveaways: $1.80, * Duplication/recording: $1.10, * Artist royalty: 83 cents, * Songwriter license: 60 cents, * Producer royalty: 27 cents, * Musicians union: 8 cents

---

Ok, so that adds up to $17. This means someone along the line is losing money on the new Eminem CD. Using it as an example, I believe it is at Circuit City and Best Buy for $10.99 right now. Where is that other $6? Is that what the "giveaway" is? Or is CC taking the hit out of the $5 that is for the retailer?

I'll pay for my songs when the artists start doing it, not the record companies. The record labels have gone on long enough with their gestapo tatics! Screw 'em!

$1 per song is very reasonable. I don't want any per month subscription crap. Let me burn it to a CD and I'll be perfectly happy. I'll be happy to download a song for $1 and know that it is good quality, and complete. I hope this works out, and they stop lobbying to hobble my PC. No way I go back to P2P if this works well.

quote:

---

Record companies as so out of touch with the real world.

---

I've realized that most entities and people that have money are out of touch with the real world...

You know sony runs their own DSL service. This makes sence, but i still don`t just those greedy little SOBs.

What sort of business plans should the artists implement? Are they to handle marketing, distribution (physical and electronic), returns, forecasting, customer service and legal issues? That's a full time job in its own.

There are over 300,000 active titles in the market now. It would be a nightmare for consumers and retailers without an standard system in place.

What about defunct artists?

They're finally getting a clue at least.. offering singles at a reasonable price so we don't have to pay for complete CD's no one wants except for the 1 or 2 songs you like, and allowing you to do what you want with it (hopefully).

I'm on the bandwagon for this.. I want artists to get paid.. I just wish the artists would do it themselves and shaft the BIG DADDY music publishers (Sony is first on the hit list). I know most of the current contracts prohibit this..

I'm sure this service will get refined over time with user input, but I think there are enough honest users out there that this can be successful.

We'll have to try it out for a month and see what happens.

said by stickfigure:

---

Plus, what if a CD I want has more than 15 songs on it. ie: Red Hot Chili Peppers Blood Sugar Sex Magic. It's going to cost me more to download it than actually go to the store and buy it... sorry but that doesn't make sense
[text was edited by author 2002-06-13 12:55:04]

---

the article mentions that its .99 a song, or 9.99 for an entire album, so if you want a 15 song album you would be kind of silly to pay for each song when you could get em all for 9.99

ya know the only bands who can really succeed at marketing themselves are big name artists who leave their record companies and go off on their own.

yes prince and david bowie and the likes have experimented with selling their own music, and yes they have said that even sellin a few hundred thousand albums like that online makes them a TON more than selling millions through a record company.

but they allready have their big names, an unknown artist really wouldnt do so well selling their music at NameofTheirUnknownBand.com...publicity and marketing are huge factor, making a 75% profit on your CD sales is great, but not if you only sell a thousand CDs.

Many times when I heard a song I liked I would think nothing about running out to the record store and buying it on a 45. Sure you got two songs but how many people can remember what was on the flip side of their favorite record? If the artist or artists were really good I would buy the album knowing I would like most of the songs on it. I did have a tape recorder back then and I guess I could have recorded the song from the radio but it wasn't worth the trouble.
I do like the idea of being able to buy just one song I like for a buck or if I want, an album for ten bucks. It sounds reasonable to me. I also agree with the people who are against a subscription scheme. I think I have probably filled a landfill all by myself with junk mail from Columbia House and the like.
If they stick to the reasonable pricing and don't try to go to a subscription type of service or try to start raising prices when they get enough of us hooked I am all for it.

I always thought record companies are charging way too much for CDs, and I think this is a great step forward. I also think as long as they are committed to using the Internet as a deliver medium, the pricing will eventually work out according to market. $1 per song is reasonable, after all, PacBell charges 0.99 for a ringtone .

said by randysavage:

---

Sony has to compete with p2p networks. How is $1 a song worth people's time? Now, if you can cut your "looking and waiting" time to nothing by going on Sony's site, then they may have something.

---

They're going to have to do everything they can to make it easier and faster to get what you want through them so you won't want to mess around with p2p. They'll also need to provide free previews, maybe segments of a song or the whole song with a lower bitrate.

said by randysavage:

---

When the prices of albums at the store are $7-$9 and you can download the albums through the "proper" means for $3-$5 then they will cut down on p2p file sharing...

---

I think $1/song is reasonable, because when you buy the whole album you're getting it just for the 2 or 3 good songs on the CD (with some exceptions).

So we'll have to see how well the labels do things, and how well people take to it. But so far it sounds like a good effort.

sorry kinda skipped over that part. Still if I can get a used CD, cover,case and disc itself used for less, why pay more?

It all sounds almost too good to me. Yea it would be great to really get a song for a dollar. BUT!!!!

First thing is to download their software. What is going to come with that software? Cookies I am sure! Spyware? hmm...
You will have to sign up, give e-mail, credit card info etc... so they will know who YOU are and where YOU live.

Would you feel safe downloading music anymore from Morpheous or any of the other P2P apps, especially if you decided to share that paid for file... Muhahahaaaa!!!!!

Michael Budney
Re: Pay Service
What sort of business plans should the artists implement? Are they to handle marketing, distribution (physical and electronic), returns, forecasting, customer service and legal issues? That's a full time job in its own.

-----------------------------------------------------------

I think that a lot of small bands have the cd manufacuring companies do their cover/booklet info, cd style, mastering, and printing of the music... They may also foward the cd to record companies and radio stations. I believe they too handle some of the copyright and legal mumbo jumbo.

So, the product is there, but what about the marketing and distribution aspects? How will these limitations of the no name band affect music sales?

Well, the cd manufacturer obviously doesn't do it all. So how do bands move their cd's? Well.... touring, great fan base, good product, good prices, and availability of sale. They must have bandname.com. They must be active on file sharing chats, etc (I think linkin park did that). In short, they must utilize technology to its fullest.

But in short... yes, if you have no money, this means you have to do it all.... Anything that a band can outsource for a decent price should probably be done. Basically roadie is going to have a whole new meaning in the future because these people will be setting up band web pages and fan clubs, helping in the customer service and legal departments, selling merchandise (t-shirts, cd's, etc.). A band most certainly can't do these things on their own; this is why the record companies have thrived. I think within the next 25 years, we will see a lot more "renaissance" bands. They will essentially have to set up their own company. Hopefully when their company takes off, they will help out more little guys and so on. Hopefully the "aspiring" musician will have an easier time making a living....

but then again... companies like sony have a big wallet

Because with used CD ou have to wait quite a while before they are available. Usually when the song or artist become overplayed and boring

$120 mm is nothing for a company Sony's size. Everyone here forgets about overhead. Salaries, rent, and other supplies adds up. If I was in their business there is no way I would give up 100 songs for $10 dollars.