Napster's Fanning has Snocap-ped vision

TalkBack 3 of 3:: « Previous

Thread View
Flat View

If it means right price, its success.: The problem is that the Labels pushed prices to the sky, far above the natural prices that would come if the market was in honest concurrence. So many people, as soon as they hear "pay", they think it's another "sky price".

When Gutenberg came with print, the price of a book got divided by 100; the price for ? of that copy was also divided by 100. Fortunately people in that era were open enough that none tried to get in the way of concurrence to keep prices high.

When disc recording came, the price for listening music came down as well.

When CD arrived, again. But little later, the record companies bought each other until they almost are now a single group with no more concurrence. And when the internet divided the price for a song by another 100, the ? for that song failed to follow as it should.

As a result, now when you buy a CD you pay $0.5 for the CD (making, recording, conditionning, distributing), $2 for the author, and $12.50 for the Label. Yes Labels deserve money, but not this high.

So if companies continue to sell a song $0.99 on the net, this is way too high, this will strengthen the forces against companies (as we see in reactions around) and jeopardize their future.

Instead they should come with a just price, say $0.99 for a full-property copy of a whole album, and accordingly for a single song. In that case people won't hesitate to buy and rebuy and rebuy the title they like, and Labels will retrieve the people's love, and make big money.

Paris, Mon 26 Jan 2004 20:20:20 +0100; Posted by: Michel Merlin Posted on: 01/26/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use