Posted by <normanstrong on 09/28/05 14:45

"FunkyDevil" <qs8rzr001@sneakemail.com> wrote in message
news:1127841818.827438.306760@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Don M. wrote:
>> "NRen2k5" wrote in message
>> news:92xZe.12378$UA1.7827@wagner.videotron.net...
>> > That's not necessarily bad. Look what the record industry does with old
>> > albums: They
>> > raise the prices.
>> >
>> > - NRen2k5
>> ===========
>>
>> Which part is not necessarily bad?
>> The music industry proposed higher prices for new albums *and* lower
>> prices for old
>> albums. Jobs said he doesn't want higher and lower. The article above,
>> not surprisingly,
>> ignored the second part.
>>
>>
>> Don
>
> Well I know they're not complaining about selling things for a lower
> price , nobody believes they are fighting itunes for lower prices.
>
> The recording industry sells the music wholesale and it's the retailers
> who decide how to price it. So, if the recording industry is upset with
> how Steve Jobs is pricing music, then they should charge him more and
> let him make the decision. They should have no say in the final
> consumer price.
>
> http://techdirt.com/articles/20050925/2229220_F.shtml

How about this? Sort music into 2 catagories, A and B. Songs in A are
$1.39; songs in B are $0.89. If you buy a song from A, you get to choose
an additional one from B as a bonus.

How do they decide which ones are A and which one B? Simple: Every new
release is in A for the 12 months following its release. Then it moves to
B.

Norm Strong

[Back to original message]