Slashdot Mirror


Google Shies Away from Digital Music Sales

mytrip writes to tell us that Google has announced that they will not be getting in on the digital music sales market anytime soon. Analysts have been predicting the response of a "GTunes" service for months but Chris Sacca, head of business development at Google, dispelled those rumors in a recent address at the annual National Association of Recording Merchandisers conference in Florida. Sacca emphasized the need for "ecosystem development" and partnerships within the industry stating that they were the "big opportunity" in the digital music business.

21 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. No wonder Google doesn't want in. by telbij · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Digital music is a rough market to be in. The only ones making any money are Apple, and that's from iPods. If the music industry had any concept of developing a new market instead of sucking it dry for the last penny maybe you'd see more companies anxious to get involved. The current business model of suing file traders and restrictive DRM is probably just driving away customers.

    Legitimate digital music is really a step backwards. With vinyl, cassettes and CDs there was a certain standard that meant if you bought music you could use it pretty much anywhere. The equivalent standard for digital music is seen as too easy to copy, so they've insisted on DRM. But the real problem is not that MP3s are easy to copy per se, but that computers have changed the rules of the game. The music industry needs to shift their focus to developing a better product, instead of crippling everything and then getting mad when people don't buy in.

    1. Re:No wonder Google doesn't want in. by rolyatknarf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "If you play it on the radio, you must play royalties." Didn't a fairly recent payola ruling show that this is not always true? For some tunes it is the other way around.

    2. Re:No wonder Google doesn't want in. by Reaperducer · · Score: 5, Informative

      You are confusing two separate issues.

      The fact remains (and this is something that many internet bitcasters can't wrap their brains around) that the average radio station pays millions of dollars each year to play music. Even if you're a crappy three kilowatt FM in some medium market, your licensing fee is going to run about a million dollars a year (Could have changed, it's been a few years since I was involved in this).

      People on the internet like to pretend that radio stations get their music for free. Yes, the record companies send them free CDs, but the radio stations still have to pay for playing them on the air. And in many cases, even small stations don't rely on free CDs from the record companies any more. They subscribe to libraries of what are essentially mix CDs full of music tailored to their audience. That's another service they pay for.

      I got out of radio several years ago, so I can only imagine what internet delivery of playlists has done to all of this. But one thing I'm sure of -- radio stations aren't playing music for free.

      --
      -- I'm old enough to have lived through six different meanings of the word "hacker."
  2. I know why google doesn't want in! by Prophetic_Truth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    filetype:mp3

    --
    time is a perception of a being's consciousness
    time is your 6th sense, the wierd ones are 7+
    1. Re:I know why google doesn't want in! by ronkronk · · Score: 4, Informative

      Stop wasting time!
      ext:mp3

  3. The stupid portal idea by chriss · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Several years ago everybody was going portal. Every search engine added shopping, communities, finance tips, travel, free mail account and tried to lure users into spending as much time as possible on their site as possible to get their cash and more cash from advertisers.

    Then came Google with a simple interface and did one thing: search. And basically everything Google released since then was build around search. Even the videos. But music is very hierarchically organized: Artist - Album - Track. You seldom have to search for something, maybe you'll use Google to search for the lyrics if you cannot remember the name of the track.

    Now everybody predicting that Google will go into music just falls into the portal trap. Hey, they did search, they have news, they do mail, so they must aim to become a portal, hence they will try to do everything and so they must want to do music.

    Think: Google = search. If the product does not fit, there is no way to make money from it for Google and they won't do it (there will always be exceptions, but that is the general rule so far).

    1. Re:The stupid portal idea by generic-man · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Google abandoned the "Google = search" idea long ago. Since Google makes 99% of its revenue from advertising, they've been diversifying the way they can serve you ads. How is a beta Jabber server "search"? How is a JavaScript map client "search"? (Sure you can "search" for businesses, but the results are pretty unreliable.) How is a JavaScript spreadsheet program "search"?

      --
      For more information, click here.
    2. Re:The stupid portal idea by SEMW · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Think: Google = search. If the product does not fit, there is no way to make money from it for Google and they won't do it...

      That was definitely once true, but I'm not sure it is any more. Google has branched out a considerable amount in recent times, way beyond its core product (searching).

      e.g.:
      • Picasa
      • Google Alerts
      • Google Checkout
      • Google Desktop [Google Desktop is a lot more than just Desktop search]
      • Google Earth
      • Google Finance
      • Google Web accelerator
      • Blogspot
      • Google Calendar
      • Google Spreadsheet
      • Gmail
      • Google SketchUp
      • Google Talk

      Etc, etc.
      --
      What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
    3. Re:The stupid portal idea by generic-man · · Score: 4, Funny

      Didn't you hear? Google's making a Web OS! You click an invite in Gmail, the meeting goes on your Gcalendar, you can view and collaborate on the spreadsheets with Google Spreadsheets, and you can hold the meeting via a teleconference using Google Talk!

      Oh, but then Firefox crashes under the burden of all that JavaScript. It's okay. Most of that stuff is still in alpha or beta, so it's not Google's fault.

      --
      For more information, click here.
  4. Google doesn't sell content by Null+Nihils · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm surprised anyone would think Google would want to be a music store. It doesn't really fit their methods and style. Google is not a retailer, they do not take content from a commercial third-party and distribute it, with markup, to consumers. This is nothing like how they currently make their billions.

    I have no doubt the minds at Google have thought of how to use music content, but I suspect one of the reasons they aren't jumping in right away is because, to put it lightly, the RIAA folks are not pleasant people to share a market with.

    In my estimation, if Google were to focus on music content, it might be something like Google Video, only taken to the next level somehow; Perhaps it would be an advanced form of Internet radio, where each user gets a personalized stream of the music they like, and Google uses their context and marketing technology to make a tidy profit off of the millions of attentive ears. And of course, the music content they included would have to be free...

  5. First to predict by ronkronk · · Score: 5, Funny

    that a half-baked story predicting that Google will enter the wireless provider market in order to support the foray into their online music business. GMusic store will allow you search 7 billion recordings using lyrics, instruments used, and sound patterns.

    Also, in 3 to 6 months Microsoft will apologize to their employees, customers, and vendors for falling so far behind as an MVNP and music distributor. But Balmer will commit to catching Apple, Google, and AllOfMp3.com within the next 3 to 4 quarters. It's Microsoft's top priority next to releasing Longhorn, WinFS, security, DRM, the next version of SQL Server, Exchange 2007,.NET,.ORG, ethic, combinatorial global business synergies and leverage points and Windows on the Power PC.

    Lastly, Apple frustrated with the iPOD to car stereo interfaces and refusal by many automobile manufacture to integrate the iPOD directly into their automobiles will purchase an Korean automobile company and begin manufacturing iCars. These cars will include new design innovations including ergonomic steering wheels and see through dash panels. Initially the automobiles will run on Honda gasoline engines, but Jobs will announce in the first 4 years of production that the iCar (and soon to be released iSUV) will switch to Toyota engines that can run on electricity, gasoline, jet-fuel, whiskey, and the sweat of some breeds of Tibetan mountain goats.

    Step aside Dvorak I have spoken.

  6. Blame the RIAA by ATMD · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google know they can't make it good (Read: no DRM), so they aren't doing it at all.

    Once the music industry finally pulls its finger out, we'll see our gTunes (beta) within a few months.

    --
    Nobody else has this sig.
  7. Oppurtunity by remembertomorrow · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If I were (one of the guys) in charge of Google, right about now I would be looking to create GMusic, a Google record label.

    Offer fair prices on albums, and offer artists the majority of the profit (aside from what is required for operating expenses).

    With all the piracy/lawsuits/RIAA crap that has been happening lately, I'm pretty sure at least a few major bands would jump at the chance to be part of a less evil label, and consumers would be happier/more inclined to buy from a label that actually supports their artists.

    --
    Registered Linux user #421033
    1. Re:Oppurtunity by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and offer artists the majority of the profit (aside from what is required for operating expenses).

      Google could probably offer them all the profit, just like they do on uploaded videos, which requires even more bandwidth. I think they have such a profitable adword model by now that they don't even need that with a music service. That would be really interesting to see how it would unfold, especially if going to a music.google.com would let you see weekly promotions, or in traditional Google style, computer automated promotions for the artists most voted for by a community. They'd get a little more visible area on the front page, and a part of their profile there. Artists would feel incentive to make good music, and they'd know they got pretty much all the profit thanks to adwords getting bandwidth costs basically out of the way. I think more than one Internet user would find it interesting. :-)

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  8. Very suspicious... by TheRon6 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If they're not looking into getting into the digital music market, what was the head of business development doing at the annual National Association of Recording Merchandisers conference? Sounds kinda shifty to me. :-P

    --
    Does this rag smell like chloroform to you?
  9. Google doesn't really do consumer by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They're really about providing free advertising funded services. Search is free. gmail is free. Groups are free. Presumably they don't want to deal with the inconvenience of paying consumer customers, who after paying a few dollars want everything. Business customers pay a lot more and are no more demanding.

  10. Announcement by jjeffries · · Score: 4, Funny

    I would like to formally announce that I, jjeffries, user #17675, will also not be entering the digital music sales market. I feel that it would detract from my primary function of making realistic Hitleresque mustaches from leftover bicycle handlebar tape.

    thank you,
    jjeffries
    user #17675

  11. I Don't Believe It by stevemm81 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't believe this. Why would Google send one of their top execs to give a speech at an organization of music retailers saying they have no interest in selling music?

    If you read the article, there are some interesting points where Sacca argues Google is already in the music business, meaning that when people hear about an artist or song, they search for it on Google. It seems like what they're saying is "we get a ton of traffic that we can easily identify of people who seem likely to buy music, we're not interested in building a music store because we know from Google Video we can't design stores, you guys sell music... maybe YOU can make a Google music store, and pay us a little sumthin sumthin."

  12. Monty Python says... by cmacb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google, unlike Microsoft does not suffer from Mr. Creosote syndrome (that nagging sensation that if anyone else is making money on a particular product or service, then you should be too). Google could stay busy for a good number of years with the irons they already have in the fire. Microsoft had better shed a few more pounds (I'm being polite) before they dine again. They have plenty on their plate already too.

  13. Agreed with Google here by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The music industry is in the middle of a revolution still (and they don't want to be in it :-p), and I think more than one Google exec may have been happy they didn't get into this business when they're now starting to see the crap Apple is starting to get, about e.g using DRM at least as much for anticompetitive practices as reducing listening rights, in a sort of an unholy alliance between their corporation and the music industry.

    The only way I think Google could get in and win would be if they made a nice little site for indie musicians, completely staying clear of anything labelled Shakira, Backstreet Boys, or that young, rich lady that played with her boobs and sucked a penis on a video tape.

    If they made something clever there, things could be interesting. Like giving uploading bands/musicians a profile page, their albums, songs, and downloads, and let them either release them as e.g. a Creative Commons license (most "free"), a free but copyrighted license, or if wishing to go commercial, for a custom fee where 95%+ went to the artists (Google could probably finance most of their bandwidth on adwords like on Google Videos). Then build a community around that where you can discuss and support the artists on forums on their respective pages, and have top lists, etc. Have monthly/weekly featured artists in different genres.

    I mean, a service to pretend RIAA don't exist and just let musicians get promoted Google's ways without a need for music companies. I think I would check out such a service. :-)

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  14. Pandora. by Gwd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If Google were to get into the music business at all, something along the lines of Pandora, or maybe even satellite radio, would make more sense. The ability to search and listen to any music that is to your liking and fine tune those searches as you go.