Say Goodbye to BuyMusic.com
dark_lotus writes "Spymac.com today is reporting
that an e-mail sent to prior customers of BuyMusic.com,
informing them that BuyMusic.com is being merged into the parent site, Buy.com.
Spymac reports: BuyMusic.com initially expected to sell one million songs
per day or 200 to 300 in the first year according to estimates
by founder and CEO Scott Blum. When re-interviewed in December, Blum offered no
statistics, but did say, 'We're nowhere near Apple's
numbers.'"
Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
...the fact that they charge $1.99 a song probably didn't help either. It's supply and demand, people. You increase price, demand falls. It's economics 101.
will be similar.
the only players in the market will be Apple and Microsoft because they have the money and product variety to support the low profit business.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Perhaps if i had
a) Heard about the site
b) They supported my browser
I might have used it. But I suppose they will just give up and sell out before trying to reach me, the customer.
~ Maintainer of the Skajake Projects
Confusing DRM: Songs purchased from BuyMusic vary widely in burns allowed, transeferring to other machines, etc.)
Limited/poor selection: Never increased from their initial catalog
Poor search functionality / confusing website layout: If customers can't find what they want, they're not going to be able to buy it.
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
Say goodbye to BuyMusic.com, the web site.
It's being integrated into the parent site, Buy.com.
Not quite the same as giving up and closing shop.
Or did I miss something?
Is it really goodbye, or more like "See you later, when you re-open down the street"...
Legal? You mean because it's in Russia and possibly beyond the reach of American and European law? Something isn't legal just because it hasn't been caught yet.
When something sounds too good to be true, it's likely because it is in fact too good to be true. $.86 an album may pay for bandwidth; it certainly isn't paying for the musicians. And much (most?) of the content they're offering is owned by the major labels, who are surely not receiving what they've contracted to receive.
After a quick look around allofmp3.com I can only conclude that they're hoping to make their pile before somebody manages to shut them down. And then they can pop up somewhere else.
The only differences between these guys and P2P are that they're better organized. And they charge you. But legal? Don't make me laugh.