Filed under: Apple Corporate, iTS, Steve Jobs
It's official: iTunes tracks will remain $0.99 each
After months
of debate (could you imagine being involved in "months of debate" with Steve? No, thanks), Apple and the Big
Four record companies have come to a deal that will allow the iTunes
Music Store to avoid variable pricing, keeping the cost of a single track to $0.99 (more or less). I'm really glad that
Apple's pricing structure came out on top in this. By pricing some tracks below some others, the record companies
identify those particular tunes as less "valuable," and therefore less desirable, than others. Keeping the
pricing the same across the board allows me to decide which is a "good" track and which isn't my cup of
tea.[Via MacDailyNews]
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Stefan Constantinescu said 7:39PM on 5-01-2006
Still too much money, record companies save not having to pay for shipping, shelf space, printing, and disc mastering.
So why are we still paying 2004 prices on music? It's insanity!
Reply
Bill I said 8:09PM on 5-01-2006
Does this mean the record companies re-signed their contracts with Apple, or that they're simply going to let their contracts expire?
....how you answer that question will DRASTICALLY change how I feel about this news. The former means while the price stays low, the content remains. The latter means it's possible for the price to be $0.99 and there to be no content to sell.
Reply
Bill I said 8:14PM on 5-01-2006
Hm - perhaps I should've RTFA, huh?
Reply
Aron T said 8:19PM on 5-01-2006
Dave, typically I like you. But I have to ask, if the price never went above $0.99 why would it bother you if a "less desirable" song cost less? Isn't that the very basis of a free market economy? Are you a communist?
=aron=
Reply
Joe B said 8:42PM on 5-01-2006
After know what many of the great musicians go through to make the great records they do, I am willing to pay the $.99. It isn't that high of a price.
My only problem with the iTMS is its horrible selection of music.
Reply
Zach Everson said 9:14PM on 5-01-2006
Gotta disagree with you, Dave. If the prices were variable, we--the consumer--would be setting the prices. The on-price-fits-all model won't last long, as it runs opposite the free-market system.
Reply
Steve said 9:18PM on 5-01-2006
I've never really understood the venom spewed on this topic. *gasp* I actually agree with record companies. Variable pricing is a very American and capitalistic idea. More demand = higher prices. I would complain, however, if higher prices for popular tracks were not offset by lower prices for older or less popular ones.
I believe that eventually you will have an online music store with variable pricing, and if that pricing undercuts iTunes significantly on older tracks, Apple could have a problem. The market generally works.
Reply
Scott Eaton said 10:40PM on 5-01-2006
Um, from prior articles on this issue: nobody cares if a song becomes LESS THAN 99 (just don't hold your breath) - the issue is that popular songs were going to be more (often much more) than 99.
Will you pay $1.29 for a new track? $2.00? For one track? Not me.
Reply