Wall
Street Journal:
They want the prices of music downloads up. If what they want would succeed even a little = lets say iTMS track price getting only a bit higher, to 1,50 $ .. it would still make a lot of users to a) buy more physical cds instead of downloading them, b) making them to return to illegal downloads or .. c) keep downloading them?? or d) make them start to use their radio??
2,50 $ for ONE track is a lot. If you can get many CDs for 10 $ why would you want to pay that amount for 4 tracks (and the price of the CD added..) ?
Does their greediness have a limit? ::evil::
I don't believe they would be suggesting this because they would suddenly start to want to pay the artists 1,50 $ per download.
Street Journal:
All five of the major music companies are discussing ways to boost the price of single-song downloads on hot releases -- to anywhere from $1.25 to as much as $2.49. It isn't clear how or when such a price hike would take place, and it could still be months away. Sales of such singles -- prices have remained at 99 cents -- still account for the majority of online-music sales.
The industry is also mulling other ways to charge more for online singles. One option under consideration is bundling hit songs with less-desirable tracks.
Another possibility is charging more for a single track if it is available online before the broader release of the entire album from which it is taken. There is also talk of lowering the price on some individual tracks from older albums.
They want the prices of music downloads up. If what they want would succeed even a little = lets say iTMS track price getting only a bit higher, to 1,50 $ .. it would still make a lot of users to a) buy more physical cds instead of downloading them, b) making them to return to illegal downloads or .. c) keep downloading them?? or d) make them start to use their radio??
2,50 $ for ONE track is a lot. If you can get many CDs for 10 $ why would you want to pay that amount for 4 tracks (and the price of the CD added..) ?
Does their greediness have a limit? ::evil::
I don't believe they would be suggesting this because they would suddenly start to want to pay the artists 1,50 $ per download.