Blogcritics: Comments on Bizarre Economics: Price Goes Down, Sales Go Up

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Sat, 5 Jul 2003 13:34:10 EDT

One of the important things isn't price, it's convenience. If I want a song for a particular moment, I want it now. Not after going to the mall to the crappy record store with their ignorant staff, who if they can be bothered, can't tell me that not only don't they know if they have Thin Lizzy CDs in stock, don't know who Thin Lizzy is. If you read "Boom Bust and Echo", the majority of the USAian and Canadian population want things which manage their time effectively. P2P networks are timesucks. If you don't have a lot of time to waste, they are horrible. There is a huge market of people who don't want to go to horrid record stores, don't want to deal with P2P, they just want the music they want -- NOW. Sadly the RIAA members are too stupid and greedy to meet this market.

Comment by Eric Olsen

Fri, 4 Jul 2003 16:36:44 EDT

Here is my thinking: I have about 20,000 records and CDs. I have purchased more than half of them. I have also sold records for those pricks for 25 years through radio, TV, writing, here, DJing live, etc. I deserve free records, I get a lot but always want ones I don't get free. I have used Kazaa a couple of times now when I needed specific songs quickly for weddings and didn't want to spend the $100 to get the CDs when I only wanted one song I was gong to play exactly once. I still didn't feel exactly right about it, I didn't really like the experience, I despise the spyware, and a lot of the songs are mislabeled. Therefore, I would be happy to buy music in a convenient, unencumbered format, with no hassles or DRM if it felt reasonable to me: $1 a song isn't reasonable, .$50 doesn't seem reasonable, $.25 is starting to feel better, $.10 feels just right - an album for between $1 and $2 and I will spend a shitload of money I don't have because it's a good deal, I always want more, and that price "feels" like free but adds up plenty quick if you like everything like I do.

Comment by Doctor Slack

Fri, 4 Jul 2003 15:52:50 EDT

Yes, Hal, it's obvious that anyone who doesn't buy something because they don't think it's good value is immoral. It's similarly obvious that anyone who refuses to pretend that technology has not advanced beyond the LP and the cassette deck is immoral. You are a light unto nations. Keep it up.

Comment by Hal Pawluk

Fri, 4 Jul 2003 15:24:34 EDT

Obviously this is not a price issue, it's morals. I agree that if you (the collective 'you') got the two-bits you'd whinge for the dime.

Comment by Brian Flemming

Thu, 3 Jul 2003 13:38:09 EDT

Hal, The difference is, the value would be so much greater that I'd actually BUY. (I mean, I do now, but I'd make it a habit were it cheaper.) 25 cents competes with free much better than 99 cents. Once the price goes low enough, people might actually use the services the way they use P2P. And people download a LOT through P2P--far more than the same people used to buy in CD form. So, they are in that habit. Price music to compete with that--i.e., basically a "convenience fee"--and they'll fire up iTMS instead of LimeWire. And they'll use it the same way, downloading gigabytes of songs.

Comment by Phillip Winn

Thu, 3 Jul 2003 13:24:53 EDT

Ouch! Hal, you've got it exactly right. That's how the RIAA looks at it - how little work can we do, or how little product can we give away, for the same amount of money. Of course, for every Brian, there is also an Eric, who spends nothing online now, but would if it were cheaper. At least he says so, but I'm still convinced that those calling for a quarter now will want a dime, and then a nickel and so on. Anyway, the RIAA share of an iTunes download is apparently 65 cents. One presume the Rhapsody arrangement is similar. If Rhapsody can accept 14 cents a track instead of 34, maybe Apple can do the same. The problem is, it isn't up to Apple or Listen.com, really. When you've only got a third of the ticket price under your control, the math doesn't work out so simply. If the RIAA would accept less, life would get interesting...

Comment by Hal Pawluk

Thu, 3 Jul 2003 13:10:40 EDT

If B would buy four songs but still spend only the same amount, what's the incentive for lowering the price?

Comment by Eric Olsen

Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:10:49 EDT

Right on B, glad you agree, you are much more involved on a practical level than I am.

Comment by Brian Flemming

Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:06:50 EDT

I wonder when the record companies will realize that if songs are 25 cents, I'll buy four times as many. If P2P shows anything, it's that the appetite for music is insatiable. I have 8,000 songs in iTunes. But if Apple thinks people will pay $7500 to fill their 7500-song-capacity iPods, they're crazy. If every song downloaded on P2P were instead sold for 10 cents or 25 cents... And I'd definitely consider 10 cents a small price to pay to avoid the hassles and poor quality of P2P.