I think we need to take a collective deep breath and think about this some more.
Having market demand set the selling price of tracks is, I believe, a great idea. Let's see:
1. Commercial/mainstream records will be sold at about the same price they are sold right now. Hence, big recording companies would make the same amount of money, and they won't care about the change.
2. Indie bands will have their tracks sold a lot cheaper. This is not bad, I think. If your band was going to sell - say - 1,000 tracks at $0.99, that means your sold $990. However, if your selling price is $0.50, you JUST MIGHT attract more than 1,000 buyers; young people are usually on a fixed budget. If they sell 3,000 tracks at that price, they'll get $1,500! And if this larger number moves their price up towards the $0.98 ceiling - well, I guess that means they are on their way to success.
In conclusion, I think this is a great idea. Which is precisely why someone will find a way to object to it.
Slashdot Mirror
I think we need to take a collective deep breath and think about this some more.
Having market demand set the selling price of tracks is, I believe, a great idea. Let's see:
1. Commercial/mainstream records will be sold at about the same price they are sold right now. Hence, big recording companies would make the same amount of money, and they won't care about the change.
2. Indie bands will have their tracks sold a lot cheaper. This is not bad, I think. If your band was going to sell - say - 1,000 tracks at $0.99, that means your sold $990. However, if your selling price is $0.50, you JUST MIGHT attract more than 1,000 buyers; young people are usually on a fixed budget. If they sell 3,000 tracks at that price, they'll get $1,500! And if this larger number moves their price up towards the $0.98 ceiling - well, I guess that means they are on their way to success.
In conclusion, I think this is a great idea. Which is precisely why someone will find a way to object to it.