If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mp3newswire.net)   PressPlay and MusicNet think you will pay $20 to rent a downloadable CD   (mp3newswire.net) divider line 37
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

2086 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Sep 2001 at 4:22 PM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



37 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2001-09-18 04:26:23 PM
Move on over Betamax....
 
2001-09-18 04:34:01 PM
Morons.
 
2001-09-18 04:34:41 PM
ha. those prices are farking ridiculous. no way in hell anyone'd pay that.
 
2001-09-18 04:36:03 PM
WE-TA-DED
 
2001-09-18 04:37:53 PM
Why does the industry even try these asinine ideas on it, it really hurts my ego.
 
2001-09-18 04:54:13 PM
$20? read this part again:
As we have pointed out in several articles in the past, the prices and conditions of ownership that MusicNet and PressPlay offer are a poor deal for the consumer (see MusicNet and Duet: Downloads Expire After 30 Days ). First of all music is rented, not purchased. A CDs worth of music will cost $20 per year to possess, which is more than a standard CD costs in stores. After the year, you can purchase additional time for another $20 a year, bringing the total cost for that CD to $40. Stop paying at any point, and the music expires leaving you with nothing.


try 20$ a year per year per cd
 
2001-09-18 04:59:09 PM
Wow you mean I can hear Britney's latest CD for just under 6 cents a day?

Sign me up!
 
2001-09-18 04:59:39 PM
... think again PressPlay and Musicnet... ENGAGE FISTS OF FURY!!!
 
2001-09-18 05:00:28 PM
Wow you mean I can hear Britney's latest CD for just under 6 cents a day?

Sign me up!
 
2001-09-18 05:00:40 PM
... think again PressPlay and Musicnet... ENGAGE FISTS OF FURY!!!
 
2001-09-18 05:02:50 PM
Wow, I can listen to Britney's new CD for less then 6 cents a day!

Sign me up!
 
2001-09-18 05:05:20 PM
Furthermore, neither service has access to all music. PressPlay only has the music of Universal and Sony. MusicNet offers the music of AOL Time Warner, EMI, and Bertelsmann. To be able to choose music from all five labels means you need to subscribe to both at about $240 a year. The average person to date spends about $90 a year on CDs.

What about that?
This is retarded.
What is the audio quality of these anyways?

I know that I would never pay to subscribe to a service that sucks ass (one may wonder why I've kept the same ISP but that isn't the point here).

On another very related note, the next person who climbs a building and yells:

"We taught it."

"I am sofa king."

"We taught it."



has my alltime admiration.
 
2001-09-18 05:06:56 PM
sorry
 
2001-09-18 05:06:58 PM
But only if it's yelled in a comical exaggeration of a stereotypical retard's voice.
 
2001-09-18 05:08:29 PM
*insert Sam Kinison hysterical laughter here*
 
2001-09-18 05:20:07 PM
I think this is incotravertable proof that big music companies are deadmeat.
 
2001-09-18 05:28:16 PM
Spikedsynapse: Yup. Espicially considering how little it costs to produce those CD's. Consider material to make the CD itself. If I can get 50 high quality 800MB CDR's for about $0.35, just think how little it would cost them to stamp about 100,000.
 
2001-09-18 05:48:29 PM
I think its getting kind of obvious that the record industry is purposely gouging any kind of over-the-wire music sales so it fails. After "years of trying" retailers won't bother to send songs out in an unsecure format, or any format at all, and everyone will still be buying CDs. Or use audiogalaxy.
 
2001-09-18 06:16:56 PM
Online will never work! Many people who love music aren't computer literate or don't like the quality. Ask any album lover for their view on cd's then ask about downloadable music. It makes them twitch rather strangely in an "exorcist" type way.
 
2001-09-18 06:46:16 PM
Jigga, is you crazy?
I can't afford to buy cd's at store prices, let alone this asinine rates.
Sheeeet, if I had that kinda money, I'd be donating it to the Red Cross or something else first right now.
 
2001-09-18 07:15:56 PM
The music industry *wants* this to fail. Then they can go to congress and say, "look we tried to sell our stuff on the Internet - honest we did - but those nasty hackers with all those file sharing programs made us fail! Can you please pass some laws to make it a federal offence to use the Internet in any way we don't directly control? Thanks, and here's a few more million for your campaign fund...."
 
2001-09-18 07:43:55 PM
That's still about $15 more than I would pay, especially since the artists (you know, the people that make all the money) don't even get 30% of that. Artists are slaves to the RIAA, and we are getting closer and closer to not needing a monopoly to distribute music, which turns a profit.
 
2001-09-18 07:45:30 PM
hahahahahah pay for music ha ha

oh goodness I have to go watch that exercise video now
 
2001-09-18 07:54:45 PM
It's exactly that kind of attitude that made the RIAA crack down on Napster and it's clones, Tom. People brought this on themselves by not buying the music after downloading it. When you look at the number of people who downloaded songs, and then look at the number of people that payed for the cds with the songs on them, it's no wonder why we are faced with idiotic things like this. Perhaps, you know, not buying music that is too expensive, would have been a better message about their pricing system.
 
2001-09-18 07:55:10 PM
er.. that should read "perhaps not downloading music you can't afford to buy..." rather
 
2001-09-18 07:56:10 PM
Of course it never worked before, so there you are. Perhaps the government should look into the monopoly that is the RIAA. That's right, the government is owned by big business like that.. nm
 
2001-09-18 08:23:53 PM
Columbia House has announced that you can now rent 12 CDs for only one penny a year, if you agree to rent 10 more CDs at the regular club price of 35 dollars a year for the next 3 years.
 
2001-09-18 08:42:50 PM
Well I dont give a fark about paying for sounds. If I want it then its always going to be found somewhere on the internet for free - I'll only buy a Cd if it is really shiat hot but thats not too often. They can try and charge all they want but at the end of the day they can GET farkED
 
2001-09-18 08:44:20 PM
wow i think this is a great idea! where do i punch in my credit card? *coughmorpheus* 'scuse me.
 
fb-
2001-09-18 08:47:59 PM
This is why they do shiat like this. They know this plan with fail. That's not what it's about. They can go to congress after this fails, with a dumptruck full of money and cry, we tried to put downloadable music out there at a reasonable price, but only those hackers and criminals download music. They won't pay us. We need tougher laws.

And Congress will support them.
 
2001-09-18 09:16:15 PM
I propose we wage Gihad against the music industry.
 
2001-09-18 09:50:48 PM
I think these prices are outrageous, too, Mr. Happy, but if people aren't willing to pay *something* for a product, why would anybody continue to produce it? I don't know if you have a job, or not, but are you willing to work for nothing?
 
2001-09-18 10:31:38 PM
I'd love to have been in the conference room when they were trying to get financing for this caper. This must be a ploy- no company could be this naive.
 
2001-09-18 10:58:42 PM
Perhaps, you know, not buying music that is too expensive, would have been a better message about their pricing system.

The biggest complaint I've heard is that $15+ dollars for a CD is just too much. CDs cost as much to produce as LPs did back when - $1. There is a certain amount of gouging going on, even after you fix the prices for inflation.

Personally, the MP3 revolution has caused me to stop buying from bands that have enough revenue to tour and not hold a second job and buy from either local acts of lesser known non-local bands.

I just bought the new Stereolab CD, but I'm not buying the new Bjork. I'm just going to do a trade. But the money I've saved lets me go to shows and pick up merchandise from bands that have no where near the selling power of Bjork. So now my money is going towards smaller independant labels and I'm voting with my dollar.

Yes, I'm officially pirating CDs but it doesn't bother me, I know that Bjork and her record company are going to make a few million off her newest album regardless. Yet my $10 CD purchase on-line or at a show is going to help to either make or break some smaller band. Not break, but if there weren't more people like me they might get dropped from their label or have to cut short their touring.

Essentially, I tend to take from those who can handle it and don't seem to mind and give to those who are currently in a situation where selling 20 CDs in a night is a god-send.
 
2001-09-18 11:46:59 PM
skallas:
cool.
(no sarcasm, supporting small bands is a good thing)
 
2001-09-18 11:49:14 PM
Even if the record industry does succeed in having congress say MP3=bad do you really think that the police are going to form anti-MP3 task forces? This isn't like kiddie porn, a subject the public will activly back, they would probably get pissed if their tax dollars went to finding people listening to songs on the computer instead of running drug ealers out of town. The recording indusrty screwed up long ago by not embracing technology. How are they going to stop open source peer to peer sharing? Are they going to confiscate all of the computers in the nation? They are going to have to accept that this is going on. they aren't going to go broke, or anything. they will just have to adjust to people having broader tastes in music.
 
2001-09-19 08:40:01 AM
this is a scam to seperate dumb kids from their 23% credit cards let the fleeceing commence
 
Displayed 37 of 37 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report