Slashdot Mirror


Cellphone Songs Overpriced?

Carl Bialik writes "Sprint's music store, the first major legal music-download service accessible from cellphones, is charging $2.49 per song because the recording industry and the wireless carriers are engaging in 'a dangerous fantasy,' according to the Wall Street Journal. From the article: 'Since people will pay $2.49 to download a snippet of a song, there's no reason they won't pay that much to download the whole thing. It's an enticing prospect, but one based on the idea that ringtones and downloads are similar. They're not; customers don't see them the same way and won't pay the same price for them, and no amount of wishful thinking will make them change their minds.' Last week, Journal tech columnist Walt Mossberg also criticized the pricing: 'For that kind of money, you'd better really, really, really want to download that new Kenny Chesney song, RIGHT NOW, before you can get to a computer.'"

50 of 270 comments (clear)

  1. Didn't we just discuss this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    yesterday? I didn't realize the WSJ was so desperate for clicks.

    1. Re:Didn't we just discuss this... by kaleposhobios · · Score: 5, Informative
      You beat me to this comment. But now I get to add:

      AND both submissions were by the same person. Q.E.D.

    2. Re:Didn't we just discuss this... by jrockway · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Submitted by the same damn person. See http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=168870&cid=140 77544.

      --
      My other car is first.
    3. Re:Didn't we just discuss this... by unitron · · Score: 3, Informative
      Actually it's different article, once the link finally works.

      First Zonk posted a submission from this guy, Carl Bialik, who apparently works for The Wall Street Journal, of a Walter Mossberg WSJ article.

      Now ScuttleMonkey posts another submission from Bialik, of a Jason Fry article and this second submission also includes a mention of (and link to) the Mossberg article.

      I guess it's a little faster than waiting for an actual Slashdot account holder to notice these articles on the WSJ site and submit them to the Slashdot editors (and I use the term very loosly), but it feels sorta "astroturfy" to me.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    4. Re:Didn't we just discuss this... by singularity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How come every time I see a comment with these sentiments modded up to a 5, the user number of the poster is a bigger number than I have ever seen on the site?

      Take a look at my user number, and then repeat with me: Slashdot has not changed that much over the years. All the "problems" you mention have been around since the beginning. Which is it - do you want Slashdot to fix them, or do you want Slashdot to remain what it is?

      I was writing about this over three years ago!

      --
      - (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
    5. Re:Didn't we just discuss this... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Carl Bialik has (at least) two accounts. One is 'Carl Bialik from the WSJ' and the other is 'Carl Bialik.' I have no objection to the first submitting WSJ articles, since it's obvious that they are submitted by a WSJ person, and people can decide whether to click on the links based on that (and the /. 'editorial' process can factor that in when deciding to accept things). I object to the use of the second account, however, since it is far less obvious.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:Didn't we just discuss this... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That now makes me a bit wary of the WSJ, it seems as if someone is merely trying to push some traffic. I wouldn't say that the actions of one persom necessarily reflects the whole organization, but it's something to watch.

  2. People pay $2.49 for ringtones? by hokeyru · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What's wrong with them?

    1. Re:People pay $2.49 for ringtones? by lintux · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm afraid not. Those people exist here (in .nl) too, just that they then have to pay something like EUR 2.49 I guess, which is even worse. But since they're young, usually their parents have to pay. ;-)

    2. Re:People pay $2.49 for ringtones? by aussie_a · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dude, it's a fucking ring tone. Use the default for crying out loud. How is a little tune to tell you someone has called you worth $2.50 US?

    3. Re:People pay $2.49 for ringtones? by damsa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't pay for ring tones, but I know why people would. People like to customize things even if it doesn't really make any sense. That's why people put type R stickers and vtec stickers, which cost a lot more than 2.50 us.

    4. Re:People pay $2.49 for ringtones? by geminidomino · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are good reasons to customize ringtones.

      I'm previously engaged (playing DQ8, sleeping, eating, engaged in biological recreation with my girlfriend, etc) and my phone is on the desk. It rings. I find it helpful to know if its my mom, brother, friend, girlfriend (obviously not in the last case above. ;)), or my monitoring server telling my shit's blowing up.

      Of course, I dropped the $10 on the moto USB cable to do it myself.

  3. Why? by Army+of+1+in+10 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why would I (or anyone else, for that matter?) want to pay $2.49 for a song I can only listen to on my cellphone when I could buy the same song from iTMS for $0.99 and listen to it on my iPod and computers, and burn it to CD then listen to it anywhere?

    --
    I am an Army of 1 in 10
    1. Re:Why? by drgonzo59 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I got some karma so I'll go ahead and burn some...

      Have you been to your local poor neighbourhood, read "ghetto" (oops karma -%25). You will see mostly black teenagers with parents on welfare but who wear $100 Nike or Fubu shoes and have $200 cellphones. They can't read, count and they can't talk coherently in English but they can and do use their 'tricked out' phones, they know how to text message (albeit in Ebonics), download ringtones, send pictures and so on. And there is your target customer base - they are the ones who will pay '2-fitty' for 'fitty-cent's latest song. They won't come within 100 feet of a computer to even know that iTunes has it for $99 cent. These are the people that buy $100 shoes when they don't have enough to pay for their rent. And I am just guessing here, but it seems there are a whole lot of them in this country. So 'a whole lot' X $2.49 = 'a whole a lot' of $

    2. Re:Why? by Wavicle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you RTFA, they tell you.

      Cell phone ring tones are about identifying you to the rest of the world: "Look I have the latest 50 Cent song as my ring tone, I am def gangsta cracker fan boy!" They appeal to people in a group identity kind of way.

      A song you listen to on your iPod is there only for you.

      --
      Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
      Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
    3. Re:Why? by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is gonna crash in flames, but what the hell, I just got over a bout of god alone knows what from a south east asian jungle, and I'm feeling punchy. What sort of a sad act actually pays for music in this day and age? I mean kerrist, wake the fuck up, welcome to the information age, son!

      Oho and hey, on a moral level its like Marv said in Sin City, applied to the RIAA et al...

      "I like hitmen. No matter what you do to them, you don't feel bad."

  4. Highest Rated Comments From First Posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    #1:
    When you think about the ridiculous prices people pay for ringtones it's not that crazy. So maybe it'll work for the songs that you just HAVE to have right now, but otherwise why wouldn't you save a few dollars and just wait till you're home and get onto the iTunes store?

    #2:
    First: Mossberg is almost right.

    The other is the cellphone carriers, or, as I like to call them, "the Soviet ministries," which too often treat their customers as captive and refuse to allow open competition for services they offer over their networks."

    Should be The other is the U.S. cellphone carriers... since competition works and takes care of this in all other markets.

    In Sweden downloadable music for cellphones is 9 cents (0.69 Swedish Crona) per song from ComvIQ [tele2.se].

    Second: No-one outside the U.S. will ever buy music just for their cell phones. Everyone over here uses SonyEricssons excellent K750 [sonyericsson.com] or W800i [sonyericsson.com] , syncing them with iTunes and MacOSX using scripts like iTMW [fidisk.fi] or apps like Dreamsicle [kaisakura.com].

    Third: I bet a case of beer that SonyEricsson [sonyericsson.com] will include iTunes [apple.com] in their cell phones during 2006. The demand is huge and they know they will have to do it, sooner or later. Nokia will also include iTunes as soon as they realize how Real sucks bigtime.

    #3
      This type of high pricing is increasing the copying of music and other illegal activities ..... if these songs are priced properly then i think it will help in stopping piracy.

    There.. now the discussion can end.

  5. For some people by zegebbers · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the convenience is worth it. (Some) people were saying that itunes wasn't worth it - why pay the same price per track as a cd for a lower quality version? If it's overpriced, the price will end up dropping.

  6. Mod Parent Down by Golias · · Score: 2, Informative

    He's re-posting a high-moderated post from an earlier thread as a means of Karma-whoring, probably so he can crapflood more effectively later. Oldest trick in the book.

    Too bad a quick scan of my recent posting history will show you that he cut-and pasted the whole damned thing (from a thread where it was far more relevant), and I happened to log in and see it, so I could point it out. Kindy spend mod points to bitchslap him into oblivion.

    Hey Karma whore, next time, at least take the trouble to plagiarize from some other site.

    --

    Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

  7. Seems logical enough by bjorniac · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I see a lot of people questioning the reasoning here, saying that it's ridiculous to pay $2.49 or whatever for a song. The premise, however, is that people are ALREADY PAYING JUST THAT for a small section of the song as a ringtone so they will probably take the whole song for the same price. Hell, if they offer the song and ringtone snippet combined for the same price, they're probably onto a winner. I know that neither you (informed Slashdot reader) nor I (cheapskate student) would pay this much, but if people are already laying out the cash for this stuff why not sell it this convenient way?

    1. Re:Seems logical enough by oldwolf13 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I paid $2 for a scooby doo ringtone.

      Only reason is so my phone would be customized to me... now I know it's overpriced... but it was just one ringtone... I might have downloaded 4 in my life.

      I'm sure a lot of people are like me... think it's overpriced.. but hell... for a one time fee, I can live with it for my scooby-phone.

      Now if you want me to start downloading a lot of music... well even 99 cents is too much... try $.75

      I can't see this succeeding

      -1 to any scooby disses!

      --
      If I can't smoke and swear I'm fucked.
    2. Re:Seems logical enough by Libraryman · · Score: 2, Funny

      I paid $2 for a silent ringtone. I assigned it to all members of the group "idiots" in my address book, and it's as though they have stopped calling me.

  8. Another thins I think they miss by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is quantity. People only use a couple ringtones at most, and generally only one even if their phone supports more. A new one is generally only purchased when they grow weary of the old one, which lasts for awhile. Thus, it doesn't seem so bad since you don't pay that often.

    Music isn't the same thing, people want a lot of music. Nobody listens to the saem song on loop, they listen to a variety, and with MP3 players a bigger variety than ever. Thus it's bought in larger bulk. Well, that means the price needs to be lower, so people will balk and not pay it.

    It would be like noticing that I'll pay $40 for a bottle of Champagne and thus assuming I'll pay the same for a pack of soda. Nope, sorry, all other considerations aside, I consume too much soda. I can swing the $40 once a year or whatever, not once a week.

    1. Re:Another thins I think they miss by BobBobBobBobBob · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Nobody listens to the saem song on loop...

      Beware of statements containing "everybody" and "nobody".

      Just because something is outside your experience don't mean that "nobody" does it.

      Offtopic, I know, but still important. If more people could incorporate this into their worldviews, there'd be less friction based on ignorance.

  9. It's pretty simple by Mancat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People are willing to pay the seemingly high price of $2.50 for a ring tone because they will buy them much less often than they buy songs. Most people will buy one ringtone and use it for a month, more or less, then move on to another one. When they go to buy songs, through iTunes or some other service, they're usually buying multiple songs at once, fairly often. At that point, $2.50 becomes far too high a price to the consumer to continue buying songs at that rate.

    It doesn't take a lot of common sense to figure this out. Why the music peddlers can't figure out is beyond me. They're always trying to push the boundaries of what the consumer will allow in the way of pricing. Right now, iTunes has it just about right. People are willing to pay .99c per song, and what's more is that they actually want to do it. They don't hesitate and think, "is this worth it?" A few dimes over that price is all it really takes to make them decide "no, it's not."

    --
    hello dear sirs my name is jamesh i are india (bihar) can u guide me install red had linux 9?
  10. Future Slashdot stories by dgrgich · · Score: 5, Funny

    Water too wet?

    Microsoft intent on world domination?

    Apple makes pretty hardware?

    Leeroy Jenkins rules at WoW?

  11. avoid the whole thing: by drijen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For over a year now, i've been using audacity and kandy to make my own ringtones and transfer them via a $11 USB cable to my Motorola V180. Voila, free ring tones from my massive collection of music.

    Not only that, but i can generally make much better sounding snippets, and pick the part of the song that i like (or the whole thing).

    This works great for wallpapers made with gimp/xv/imagemagick as well.

  12. Mod THIS parent down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    He's asking for negative moderation on a reposting of a highly-moderated post from an earlier thread as a means of Karma-whoring, probably using an alternate account to post the original reposting. Second oldest trick in the book.

    Hey circuitous Karma whore, next time, at least take the time to flame a repost that ranks highly on some other Karma-based comment system.

  13. I'm really starting to feel my age... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember reading "Rock and Roll" magazines when I was a teenager and seeing page after page of ads for t-shirts, bandanas, stickers, etc.

    I was browsing magazines a few months ago and saw that one of the books I used to read was still being published. For kicks I bought a copy. Later on the train depression overtook me as I realized that...

    1. I had no idea who ANY of these bands were, nor did I want to.

    2. T-shirts have been replaced by ringtones. Page after page after page of RINGTONE ADS. Ai yi yi...

    Back in my day we annoyed people with our stupid shirts, and uh, we were GLAD to have 'em!

  14. Stallman quote, just to remind you of it by buro9 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Value your freedom or you will lose it, teaches history.
    'Don't bother us with politics', respond those who don't want to learn." - RMS

    So yes, Slashdot is more 'political' these days. Is it such a bad thing?

  15. Re:Mod THIS parent left by three by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Mod this parent left by three, the parent of this parent needs to be modded clockwise and the parent of the parent of this post's parent needs to have its moderation put through a bitwise XOR with a prime number between 11202 and 13407. Once completed, delete all moderations, all posts, and spend 50 minutes studying dewarneb.

  16. If you consider... by mark-t · · Score: 2, Interesting
    ... why people pay anything at all, even one cent, for a ringtone, you'd have insight into why they are also willing to pay $2.49 for it, and why they wouldn't be willing to pay the same price for the "privilege" of downloading it onto their computer or mp3 player.

    Need a hint? Consider when's the last time you heard a cell phone ring and it actually sounded like a ringing phone of some sort?

    Here's another hint. It has less to do with the songs or the artists than it does with the psychology of the consumer and their own egos.

  17. Track costs by coleblak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    would be a lot more feasible if they charged a percentage of what a cd costs. If it's 16.99 for a CD by a specific artist and you want a track off of it, that track should cost a dollar oh seven. Making prices the same as what the disc would cost at the store is logical. Which means, obviously, the RIAA won't go for it.

    --
    77 HITS
    Really Long Off Topic Combo
  18. Sigh by nexcomlink · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sadly I know many people who would buy a song for $2.49. They do what ever is popular and basically go around playing tunes on there phones while walking down the hallway. This might not make sense for the common adult. But for a teenager to have what's "hot" these days and having full length ringtones is all what they really go for these days. So expect to see a but of teens all huddled around using the cellphone as a stereo. I seen it happen with little ringtones which only last 15 seconds. So I am not surprised to see this go popular if they see some kind of pop icon showing it off as "cool". Just like the Hummer H2 everyone saw the rapper 50 Cent with it. Two week's later everyone would talk about H2's and some even go and buy one. Money is no object when it comes to popularity.

  19. Why are people paying for ring tones anyway? by Hamster+Lover · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My friend just bought a new Samsung phone (or was it LG?) through Rogers here in Canada that supports wave or Mp3 downloadable ring tones. He didn't want a musical ring tone he wanted a real mechanical bell ring like that from his old rotary dial phone. We recorded the phone ring as a wave file and uploaded it to the phone, easy as pie. We could have chosen any song in his collection without purchasing a ring tone, although Rogers certainly offers that option.

    I know at least a half dozen other friends whose phone will do the same thing given the proper cable. Why are people paying for ring tones? It must be convenience or perhaps its due to Rogers not crippling the features of their phones like other carriers in the U.S.

    1. Re:Why are people paying for ring tones anyway? by vettemph · · Score: 2, Informative

      >>>phone will do the same thing given the proper cable.

      "IF" your phone can browse the internet and you have some free webspace from your ISP, you can create a web page for yourself and put the wallpapers and tones on it.
        Browse to your mobile friendly [minimalist] web page to download.

      --
      The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
  20. I would pay much more than that by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...to be able to delete these annoying tones on other people's phones.

  21. Future Slashdot Headlines by lpangelrob · · Score: 4, Funny
    Price of Bottled Water Suspiciously High
    from the I-got-ripped-off-at-Great-America-again! dept.

    Brand Name Drugs Surprisingly More Expensive Than Generics
    from the v1@gr@-isn't-a-generic? dept.

    Study Finds Americans Spend Way Too Much Money On Pointless Gadgets
    from the look-at-me-I-have-a-clapper dept.

  22. Voltaires' Bastards by JumpingBull · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Is it just me, but has the corporatist agenda suffered a complete disconnect from reality?
    Perhaps John Raulston Saul *is* the lone voice crying in the wilderness...

    We are not just wallets to be picked clean in the most expedient way; perhaps it is time to remove the fictional person status from corporations, and make some other legal arrangement that would involve more of an explicit social contract.

    As it now stands, the corporations have taken over much of the public dialog.

    Having a moral finesse less then your average alley cat, they strive to offer the best "shareholder value" by an official policy that appears to be one of rapine and pillage.

    Perhaps we should have "The Corporate Hun" award?
    Or perhaps the Corporatist Pravda where the Official Truth can be promulgated unto the masses?

    --
    This is progress?
  23. What I don't get by el_womble · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is why people don't put the songs on their phones themselves? They're quite happy sending photos to each other via bluetooth and downloading songs to their iPods so why don't they download songs to their phones?

    I've been doing it for a 4 or 5 years now (initially with IR and midi which I could understand was probably beyond most) but now that its just a case of dragging an iTunes song too your desktop then pressing cmd-shift-b (or right clicking it and choosing send file) to send it to your phone it amazes me that people don't do it more often.

    I guess this is the point that the poster was trying to get across. People really don't associate iTunes music with ring tones. It's completely seperate in their heads. One's an impulse buy that they can do whilst watching TV, or waiting for a bus, the other is a considered purchase, even if it is half the price. The only thing that could change that is if Apple introduce a 'make ringtone button' to iTunes - that would REALLY piss off a lot of people (except of course the customers).

    --
    Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
    1. Re:What I don't get by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The reason why most people (note: not the minority of geeks here on slashdot) don't do that is because they don't want to bother, may not know how, or don't know they can. Its not like the cellphone companies are pushing the datacords as much as they are ringtone services. The companies know how much more money they make off of ringtones, so they advertise that as THE way to get ringtones. Frankly, they would be stupid to do otherwise.

      But you really would be amazed at how many tech savvy people out there don't know they can upload their own ringtones. The cellphone companies do a great job of brainwashing people.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  24. Re:WSJ's right by grimJester · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I agree. A ringtone is something you show off, not something you buy to listen to. A T-shirt with a witty slogan is worth far more than a page of a book containing the same slogan.

  25. Well... Ya by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There's a big, wide area between not wanting to learn about politics and not wanting everything in your life to be political. I don't want politics in a lot of things, like my video games for example, or my technical information. If I bought a book on Linux Administration and it truned out to be 20 pages of tech information and 400 pages of OSS preaching, you can bet I'd be pissed. It's not because I'm ignorant of politics, it's because I don't like spending all my time on any one thing.

    I don't mind politics on /. there are politics relivant to geeks, however it does seem to be getting a little heavy these days. I started comming here for the geek features, espically things like cool geek projects. I'm not that intrested in politics, as I find there are better sources on the net.

  26. What we need is by Council · · Score: 3, Insightful

    customers don't see them the same way and won't pay the same price for them, and no amount of wishful thinking will make them change their minds.

    Man. If only we had some sort of a SYSTEM for determining what things should be priced, some sort of an open market in which companies could set prices and see how many people are willing to pay that price. That would be great.

    --
    xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.
  27. No No No by Mr_Silver · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Sprint's music store, the first major legal music-download service accessible from cellphones

    As someone who set up and managed a major legal music-download service accessible from cellphones over three years ago I really wish the Slashdot editors would actually verify "first" claims like these.

    Oh yes, and in case you were wondering, the music tracks were overpriced back then too.

    --
    Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
  28. People PAY for ringtones? by ajs318 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My old Nokia 3210 had a feature called "composer" where you could type in a tune, note by note, up to 50 notes long. You got three octaves including accidentals, but only one timbre {"tinny little mobile phone speaker"}. Still, if you were canny, you could fit in just enough of the tune to recognise; and 50 notes is actually long enough to answer a telephone, so nobody is going to notice if it stops short.

    My new Sony Ericsson {bought before the rootkit debacle, honest!} k750i supports the ability to download ringtones from my phone company's overpriced music store, but it also has several wireless transfer modes. And although the phone refuses to allow you to send a paid-for tone by bluetooth or infrared, there is one thing it can't or won't stop me doing, one wireless transfer mode that is available unconditionally.

    If I press Menu, Entertainment, Record Sound, Select, then it uses the phone's own mic to record a sound bite -- which I can later use as a ringtone, and even send to other people by BT or IR. And it works better than you might think. Modern phone mics are quite directional; it has automatic gain control; and the ultimate frequency response is limited at playback time by the ringer speaker. These are all factors that work in your favour. What can the phone manufacturers do about this? Not a lot. They can't very well make phones with no mic; though I admit, I would certainly buy one for my mother if they did .....

    I can get all the ringtones I want, just from watching the TV adverts for them -- so I must be saving a fortune! Although admittedly, it is kind of like a "walk instead of taking the bus - save a pound; walk instead of taking a taxi - save a fiver" saving, cos it's not money IO would ever have spent -- if I couldn't get them for free, I would be more than happy to do without.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  29. Re:Four words. by The+Great+Pulgoso · · Score: 2, Funny

    err... Vibrate mode? although it could be a problem in a crowded elevator :)

  30. Let the market work it out by Luscious868 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If cellphone songs are overpriced, I'm confident the market will work it out. People just won't buy. I personally don't see much of a point in having a cellphone / mp3 player combination, especially if there is no way to get the overpriced songs you order from your cell provider off of your phone and into a format that you can play on your PC or other portible music player. I'll stick with iTunes and my iPod. Oh and before anyone jumps on my case about the DRM on the songs you purchase from the iTMS, it's about the easiest stuff to get around on the planet. There are tools to strip the DRM and get a plain old AAC file or you can just burn them to CD and re-rip to mp3. Is there bit of a quality loss? Yes. Is it noticeable to me? No.

  31. Slightly Offtopic but Interesting (I hope) by Halo- · · Score: 2, Informative
    Was I the only geek who got excited that the WSJ article linked to Wikipedia? (Granted it was to the article about "Crazy Frog" but still...)

  32. Re:seconded by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Funny

    well, one change is we have to add BS to get past the filters

    And don't forget the karma cap (and "fuzzy" karma display). I used to sit at work for hours practicing my karma-whoring technique. Got up to 75, then they capped it at 50 (I kept my 75, but new positive moderations wouldn't increase it, while occasional negative mods slowly decreased it down to 50).

    Of course, karma-whoring is even easier now that subscribers can preview stories.... but with the karma cap, the thrill is gone.

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;