[ Sponsored Links ]

Advertise here »

Napster - lots of fun if you don't need to 'own' songs

reply to message » post a new message » e-mail to a friend »
Subject:  Napster - lots of fun if you don't need to 'own' songs Chris Lake
Author:   chrisl :   view profile | all posts by this author | add to favourites
Date:   17:02:19 24 May 2004
 
Ah yes, but the concept of ownership really doesn't come into it if, like me and two of my flatmates, you simply want to stream songs on demand.

Napster is fabulous fun for £9.95 per month... so long as you are happy to listen via a laptop (I've already been shopping for leads to connect it to speakers/TV) and forgo 'ownership' of the songs.

We sat for hours creating playlists of obscure songs last heard in the early 1990's. Great fun.

Do I need to transform these streamed files into MP3s? No. I haven't yet bought an MP3 Player (donations to the usual address). So for less than £2.50 per week, I can listen to tracks on demand, and lots of tracks there are (some exceptions include record labels such as 4AD and Creation, but I'm sure Beggars and the other indie stalwarts will come good in the end).

The interface works well, though we've already identified a bunch of improvements that Napster could phase in, to make it even better.

Overall, first impressions are very positive, depsite the price fixing that appears to have gone on at industry (record label) level to ensure that you can't own songs at a price less than you pay for CDs.

Quite what the point of that is I don't know, other than 'protecting business interests', which is half-understandable and half-laughable (what would you choose, a CD from Amazon for £9 - with fancy packaging etc - or a Napster album for £10, albeit one you can customise?).

The digital distribution industry for audio and video will surely go from strength to strength, but this concept of ownership might be misunderstood... so long as I can listen to it, then I'm happy. I don't need to own it.

The jukebox-on-demand is very appealling and you have to wonder what's going to happen when wireless devices have the same level of access as I do via my 1mb home connection. Then, surely, 'owning' something doesn't come into it...?

Chris.


On 13:45:17 20 May 2004 johnnyh wrote:
>Is it just me or is everyone else suitably loathing of the
>music industry's pathetic attempts to further their
>strategy of screwing consumers?
>
>At £1.09 PER TRACK, Napster UK, which has just
>launched today (www.napster.co.uk), has surely got it all
>wrong. Remember that this is NAPSTER, the black-eyed
>industry-shafting bunch that is all of a sudden making up
>for its earlier 'free' model by ripping of UK consumers.
>And Europeans. And Americans (but not as badly).
>
>There will obviously be some sort of user base by the end
>of the year - my question is whether these people are
>clinically short of a few shillings? Well, given that they
>will be paying £1.09 per track, they aren't short in
>the fiscal department, but is there anyone home upstairs?
>
>For years we have seen CD prices rise and rise - £17
>isn't uncommon for certain artists nowadays, though thanks
>to the likes of CD Wow and Amazon (which offer the latest
>albums for about £9), offline retailers are having to
>compete a little more for business.
>
>We have heard all the tales of consumer revolt as the
>tabloids went crazy about comparative CD prices in the US
>- something like £7 for a new CD. Then there's the
>exchange rates... the UK holidaymaker can pick up bargains
>galore these days.
>
>Yet when we strip out the whole process of making a CD,
>which is after all a real product involving paper and
>plastics and metals and printing and so on. There is a
>cost to making each and every CD, unlike the
>virtually-zero cost of providing these files to the online
>distributors, in digital format.
>
>The record labels own the manufacturing plants and the
>labelling/packaging plants. Maybe they don't want a
>digital distribution model, lest they be forced into
>closing these plants down. But surely digital is cost
>effective and the rise of the on-demand model for
>entertainment products is a no-brainer for the record
>companies to get into.
>
>But hey ho, they actually RAISE the price of tracks in the
>UK (compared to the US). OD2 charges 99p per track -
>again, total industry rip-off tactics that do nothing for
>the consumer. At least we might see some price
>competition, but I for one won't touch these services
>until pricing better reflects true worth.
>
>If a CD sells on Amazon for £9, and if Amazon and
>everyone else can make a little margin on this (given the
>offline distribution model and manufacturing/packaging etc
>- ie lots more costs), then how are consumers expected to
>swallow £1.09 per track? I don't get it.
>
>Except I do. This is proof positive that the reocrd
>companies are still locked in the Dark Ages, that they are
>sitting comfortably and that they do not want to change
>the status quo.
>
>They will accomodate a digital music industry, but only if
>it doesn't damage the offline model. How much profit do
>you get from £1.09 per track? Where does it all go?
>How much will Napster/OD2 see?
>
>Is this just one big price fix, with the industry at large
>agreeing cartel-style to a minimum price per track ie
>£1? Maybe Napster takes the other 9p? Of that
>£1, how much is cost and how much is profit? Compare
>that to the costs of producing and distributing a CD...
>how does it add up?
>
>It sucks, but will we see any action from the powers that
>be? Probably not - the best we can hope for is that
>consumers recognise these prices as disgraceful and ignore
>the Napsters of this world until the record industry gets
>wise.
>
>It would be very interesting to learn how many extra music
>lovers would buy into these services if the price per
>track was halved. My bet is that there would be a
>significant uplift in numbers. I'd pay 50p many times over
>for my favourite songs. I reckon they'd sell at least
>twice as many songs, maybe ten times as many. The price
>would be so much more appealling, more digital music
>players would be sold, the industry would accelerate...
>but what would the effects be on CD sales?
>
>It is a curious conundrum and no-one will know the outcome
>unless someone tries it. But who will, who can? It just
>looks more and more like the record industry has the
>digital distribution market all sewn up, and these
>initiatives are merely a way of keeping price levels
>intact.
>
>Pathetic.
 
« Back to Internet Marketing Forum Previous Thread »  |  Next Thread »
« Back to Internet Marketing Forum Post a new message »
Subscribe for only €299