Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple iTunes to End Flat Fee Pricing?

Posted by Zonk on from the under-pressure-is-not-just-a-queen-song dept.

MdntToker writes "According the Forbes, EMI has an understanding with Apple that flat fee pricing will end within the next 12 months, and more popular songs will be priced higher than 99c, while lesser known acts will be priced lower than 99c." From the article: "Label executives have made multiple arguments for flexible pricing. They argue, for instance, that almost all retail businesses have different price points for different products. But they are particularly interested in boosting their revenue from digital music sales, which aided by the sale of mobile phone ringtones, are increasing but not quickly enough to replace the continuing drops in compact disc sales. EMI said today that digital sales, made up 4.9% of the company's sales in the last six months, up from 2.1% a year ago." We've previously reported on this story.

3 of 556 comments (clear)

  1. And so it begins.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder if 'flexible pricing' will allow them to adjust prices 'on the fly' - let's say 10,000 users download Song A priced 99c and software automatically then adjusts the price to say 1$ 29c or similar price.

    Then again, there is no end to corporate greed so I'm expecting to see this in action.

  2. Is this really a bad thing? by Ossifer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Shouldn't B-sides actually be cheaper than the hits? New material more expensive than oldies? People have been justifiably complaining for years of having to buy whole albums just to get one or two songs they want, and now they don't have to.

  3. Why the heck doesn't Apple: by PortHaven · · Score: 5, Interesting

    1) Start signing bands on a 50/49 cent split. (OMG...can you imagine it, artists getting more money than the label for a change)

    2) File a lawsuit on behalf of the artists...that said artists only negotiated "analog" recording distribution rights. That none of the old contracts covered digital distribution. And that all of the artists retain the rights to their digital distribution, including the right to negotiate a digital distribution contract.

    (Think about it, a) the common people would support it as I would buy a lot more music at $0.99/song if I knew the artists actually benefited. b) think of how many artists would support such a move? big names too like "Paul McCartney"... As many artists were screwed over big time. Even big name artists saw very small percentages of their songs. This would allow Paul McCartney to regain ownership of his music (for digital distribution only). RIAA would still retain the analog rights (but we all know that's a dying medium). And with RIAA pushing so much legislation distinguishing the difference between Analog and Digital (DMCA) there may in deed be enough cause for a court to decide in Apple's favor especially if 90% of the artists and consumers are in favor of it as well.

    RIAA would find themselves the owner of an extinct business model. Left with a rotting carcass...

    - The Saj