Apple denies price hike rumors

Quote:

---

originally virtually all albums were sold at $9.99, but nowadays some albums are priced at $16.99, which makes them more expensive than the physical CD equivalents in the United States.

---

Stupid people.

I used to like the Apple/Mac people a lot more than I do nowadays. Their credibility is failing. At $16.99 US per album, a "sneaky" increase quickly 'slipped' into the system, reduces my once-much-higher respect for them. Do they think we are blind? Did they think we wouldn't notice? Were they hoping we wouldn't care? More hype. More shady business practice. More greed. Same old 'sock-it-to-the-consumer' shit all over again. "Whatever the market will bear", eh, Apple? I'll stick to good 'ol .mp3, thank you very much. Quality hardware .mp3 players abound. You can keep your proprietary-format, drm-crippled $16.99 albums.

Apple has denied the rumors that they've been forced to hike the prices on iTunes songs from the current levels of $0.99 to $1.25 HA! Let's read this article again in a month!

$17 for an mp3 album? and they wonder why kazaa is so popular- i can buy a physical cd myself in much better quality- and be able to make backups of it without annoying protection- for only $13 WHY THE HELL WOULD ANYONE PAY MORE FOR LOSSY QUALITY FLLED WITH ANOYING PROTECTION. /rant btw- DONT EVEN get me started on apple- those bunch of pricks

Oh my God! You mean they actually want you to provide personal information to claim your free iTune???Those bastards! sorry it took a moment to respond to this outrage but I had to first provide personal information in order to post a message here. Now where was I...oh yes THOSE BASTARDS!!! And yeah I'll bet the artists get hardly anything! Those poor, barely able to eek out a living, starving artists. And another thing...what about this 99 cents per song crap. Why hell we can all steal the stongs for free using Kazaa? And that evil giant Apple sneaking in a price hike for their albums. Well yes the major labels demanded the price increase and yes the labels represent the poor, barely able to eek out a living artists, but damn Apple anyway... I have to say this has been most entertaining...it's amazing the ignorance level in this forum.

Quote:

---

Were they hoping we wouldn't care?

---

This is the one I´m betting on. Did they think that this wouldn´t affect sales at all? I think people have a general idea of how much store-bought CD´s cost, why would they then settle for compressed immaterial digital files for the same price? The AD article says only 'some' albums carry the new price-tag, though.

Hahahaha!!! :-) (1a3bc6, you have a good sense of humour). Maybe we're all overlooking the most important point. CONVENIENCE. That, along with the 'impulse purchasing' aspect. Apple, along with every other music-download service, relies heavily on the impulse-buying convenience that their sites provide, and people's tendencies to *want* to buy on impulse. You don't have to drive to the music store. Or the store might be closed (after hours or it might be a Sunday). Or the store might be sold out of a specific title, requiring a back-order. If you already have an account and a hi-speed connection, you can, with just a couple of mouseclicks, have what you want almost *immediately*. Never mind that the music files in question couldn't measure up to the quality of the cd-made equivalents in their lives depended on it; never mind that the songs are drm-crippled; never mind that you have just been screwed again (completely overpriced product). But Oh! Wasn't that SO easy and convenient! I mean it - .mp3 files today are sonically every bit as good as iTunes and the others (like .wma). And mp3 players are *everywhere*. I still use P2P. Just about every new set-top dvd player today, now has built-in mp3 support. Present-day mp3 is 100% uncrippled. Apple needs to smarten up, or else put up with whatever flak it gets.

kazza lite +++ is here to stay!!!

1a3bc6 "it's amazing the ignorance level in this forum." Yeah, it really is...