News

Jobs, Apple On Collision Course With Record Labels Over Pricing

Similar to a report on Friday from The Mac Observer, The New York Times reported over the weekend that Apple CEO Steve Jobs is on a collision course with a number of major record labels that could see the price of music downloads going up in the near future.

"Signs of conflict over pricing issues are increasingly apparent," the newspaper reported. "Mr. Jobs is now girding for a showdown with at least two of the four major record companies over the price of songs on the iTunes service. If he loses, the one-price model that iTunes has adopted - US$0.99 cents to download any song - could be replaced with a more complex structure that prices songs by popularity. A hot new single, for example, could sell for $1.49, while a golden oldie could go for substantially less than 99 cents."

The report said some music executives are siding with Mr. Jobs and arguing against price rises, saying, "higher prices could backfire, sending iTunes' customers in search of songs on free, unauthorized file-swapping networks."

"A sore point for some music executives is the fact that Apple generates much more money selling iPod players than it does as a digital music retailer, leading to complaints that Mr. Jobs is profiting more from tracks downloaded to fill the 21 million iPods sold so far than are the labels that produced the recordings," the NYT reported.

Interestingly, the report said another other main battleground in Apple's coming confrontation with the music industry will be over "interoperability" of services and devices.

"Mr. Jobs has so far refused to make the iTunes software compatible with music players from other manufacturers, and he has prevented the iPod from accepting music sold from competing services that use a Microsoft-designed music format," the report concluded. "As a result, songs purchased from Napster, for example, will not play on an iPod."

Sony BMG in particular has taken steps that may apply pressure to Mr. Jobs to make Apple's software compatible with that of other companies. The company has issued dozens of new titles - including high-profile CD's from the Dave Matthews Band and the Foo Fighters - with software to limit the number of copies that can be made from the disc. The software is compatible with Microsoft's music software, but not Apple's, and as a result music from those Sony BMG albums cannot be transferred to iPods that are hooked up to Windows-based PC's. EMI has been test-marketing similar software with a handful of titles.

3 comments from the community.

You can post your own below.

+ show options

Your current settings, click to change: Sort Oldest First, Show Guest Posts, Hide Community Stats

Al Swearengen said:

member since 10 May 2005 with 339 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Jobs just made a top 30 list of business leaders. I didn't see any music industry people on that list.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

I agree with those executives and Steve Jobs that if they start raising the prices people will go back to downloading somewhere else that is not so legal but free. These greedy executives are just starting to see success in the online music business and now they want to ruin it by raising prices right away. I guess they don't make enough money as it is so now they want more. Well I think if you go for more then you better not complain when the customers go for less somewhere else.

Quote this post ↓

algr said:

member since 07 Aug 2003 with 282 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Quote:
"A sore point for some music executives is the fact that Apple generates much more money selling iPod players than it does as a digital music retailer, leading to complaints that Mr. Jobs is profiting more from tracks downloaded to fill the 21 million iPods sold so far than are the labels that produced the recordings,"

The blind greed of these people knows no bounds. It's not enough that Apple doesn't make much money selling their music, they want to be paid for Apple selling a product that they had nothing to do with! Is Apple supposed to be a non-profit sales force for them? What value would their music have without the companies that make the players that people listen to?

Quote this post ↓

Post Your Comments

  Remember Me

Not a member? Register now. You can post comments without logging in, but they'll show up as a "guest" post.


Please enter the word exactly as you see it in the image above. Registered users aren't prompted for this. Having trouble reading the image get a new one.