RSSRecord Labels Planning Subscription Music Service?
By Ed Oswald | Published October 12, 2007, 5:28 PM
All of Universal's jockeying with iTunes may make sense now: the label may be planning a subscription music service of its own with other big record companies. But will the labels' own service be used simply to retain a stranglehold on the market rather than giving consumers more choice?
Universal has its own catalog, and is apparently taking to Warner Music Group about putting that label's music on the service. It has reportedly already signed up Sony BMG. Business Week reported Friday that the move is aimed at taking more control over the distribution of digital music, which Apple has a near stranglehold on.
Together, the three labels would control about 3 out of every 4 music tracks sold in the US. Universal Music's chief Doug Morris also has hope that the service, dubbed "Total Music," would lift up competitors to the iPod, such as Microsoft's Zune.
If the rumors are correct, users would shell out money only for the Total Music player itself. The roughly $5 per month fee to download music would be absorbed by hardware makers and cellular carriers. However, it is not clear how that would affect the price of the player itself.
Such a setup would be drastically different from what is currently available, which has some industry watchers questioning the speculation. iTunes users not only shell out anywhere from $79 to $249 -- or even more -- for the player, but 99 cents for each track that they download over that.
Insiders figure that the cost per player would run around $90 for the subscription service, figuring that most digital music player owners keep their devices for about 18 months. It is quite possible that the Total Music players could be quite a bit more expensive initially to recoup some of that cost. Such a strategy might hinder sales, especially since customers would essentially lose their music collections if they lose their player, or if it breaks.
3 out of every 4 tracks? No wonder the music business is in the toilet.
Score: 0
|"will the labels' own service be used simply to retain a stranglehold on the market rather than giving consumers more choice?"
Thats the stupidest rhetorical question BN has posted in a while. duh.
Score: 0
|I wonder what the cost per song will be? $9,250 per track? ;)
Score: 0
|more like $9,250 a track that can be played 4 times , then deleates itself ..... ;=)
Score: 0
|I would NEVER get subscription music, Period!
Score: 0
|I second that.
Score: 0
|If its DRM music and "you know it is" I would not want at all even if it was free :)
Score: 0
|RIAA music on a Zune? I can't stop laughing. This might be the only combination that could be more anti-consumer than itunes/ipod.
Score: 0
|Selling songs online? I for one don't think this "web" or "internet" thing will ever catch on. Most people don't know it exists.
Score: 0
|Universal has its own catalog, and is apparently taking to Warner Music Group about putting that label's music on the service.
Talking?
Need more info. Are these tracks going to be DRM, stream-only, portable?
Everyone below apparently has more info than was reported as they've already damned the service, but it would be nice to know more.
If, as reported, it will play on the Zune, then it must be somewhat portable. Unlimited tracks for $5 a month sounds like a hell of a lot better deal 99 cents a track for folks who consume a lot of music...
Score: 0
|wouldn't be paying the fee.
The roughly $5 per month fee to download music would be absorbed by hardware makers and cellular carriers.
probably would jack the price of the device but for unlimited music for roughly 18 months doesn't sound too bad
Score: 0
|is this story from the onion? lol.
they keep trying to push this lame service that no one wants with their subscription based, propertarian media locked to a single device at reduced quality that can also expire, so they can force apple out the way so they can resume price fixing and push up the price.
i can see this working, thanks anti consumer f**ks but we say no! we are not steve, we have a brain and see through your marketing scams.
i wonder if the batteries are fixed and can only be charged so many times and if they need replacing the battery would cost nearly the same as a new unit!
http://arstechnica.com/n...ink-jet-cartridges.html
"The razor blade magnate King C. Gillette was alleged to have said that he would give away the razors for free if he was guaranteed to sell replacement blades. Manufacturers of inkjet printers have been operating on this model for many years now, selling printers at very low cost while raking in profits on the sale of replacement cartridges, some of which cost nearly as much as the printer itself. Now San Francisco-based Cryptography Research Inc. (CRI) is developing chip technology that can be included in inkjet printers to prevent owners from using third-party ink cartridges."
Score: 0
|Those chips have been around for a while in most printers and yet I continue to buy 3rd party cartridges for my company and they work just fine.
Consumers have a say in all this too. They won't tolerate service designed to screw them out of their money for long.
Score: 0
|Nothing I'd get involved with.
Score: 0
|Music company subscription service? They could employ the RIAA to help them run it. What a splendid idea.
Score: 0
|It's nice to see some record companies trying to adapt new business models when it comes to online music. The world of music, especially digital music, has changed so much over the past 15 years.
I won't be completely optimistic until I hear more details about this over the next couple of months.
Score: 0
|should offer a way to have online backup of the music catalog where it stores an index of the songs so can quickly mark all songs for download and reload the library on a replacement device.
Score: 0
|I have a feeling this was the record industries intentions all along.. get us used to the idea of downloading music legally and paying for it and then setting up shop on their own
Score: 0
|