Are you complicit in iTunes downfall?




Recent developments in the market place for digital downloads of music have resulted in iTunes being seen as the black sheep in the family.

Although Apple have made a lot of money for the record companies, (Apple sees iTunes as a break-even arrangement, taking very little from each song sold, making money from sales of hardware instead), the record companies are not happy.

iTunes success, has resulted in Apple having a great deal of power in terms of the prices they are willing to sell music at (regardless of what the record companies want), to-wit – we see prices on iTunes remaining pretty consistent across the range.

This benefits the consumer, (who are Apple’s main focus here), for other online retailers who have allowed the music companies to dictate pricing terms, have not been as successful as Apple, hence their almost complete demise.

This has irked those record companies greatly, for they are used to having almost total control of their industry.

So we have seen a change of direction; they have now started offering competing online music providers, different, and much better terms and arrangements to sell their music, while Apple is left out in the cold.

We’re seeing no DRM, better choice of music and lower prices in competing services.

Most, if not all the media see this as a benefit to the consumer, and a sign that the record companies are finally giving in and embracing the future, and hey, iTunes having competition is a good thing, right?

They’re wrong. Why? let me explain.

Apple have remained steadfast in their demands that pricing on iTunes is consistent. The record companies wanted tiered pricing, and Apple correctly stated that one of the reasons why iTunes was successful, was the ‘across-the-board’ pricing.

The record companies then realised that this was a battle they could not win, unless they sacrificed a couple of things in the short term, to win back something in the future.

These 2 things are DRM, and pricing.

They sacrificed DRM because a) of a change in customer demand and media momentum which they couldn’t control, and b) to give them leverage against Apple, hence the offering of DRM-free music to the linkes of Amazon.

They sacrificed pricing to again, give them leverage against Apple, but only temporarily.

Why do they want leverage against Apple? They want this so they can bring competitors to iTunes dominance.

Is that not a good thing though? NO IT ISN’T.

Why isn’t it? Because 5 years from now, if they are successful and iTunes dominance is eroded to the point where the record companies don’t have to listen to it’s demands, what will be left?

You will have the record companies on one side, and on the other side a number of partners who will not be powerful enough to dictate pricing terms, as Apple has in the past.

What will then happen?


They will then be able to do what they like, kill online music stone dead if they want to and return to the more profitable and controllable model of CD’s, or worse.

Do I have any proof of this? No, of course not. But answer me this, if this isn’t true, and the only reason why the record companies are doing this is to bring competition, cheaper prices and no DRM to the industry, then why don’t they let Apple join in now?

By not letting Apple join in now, they seek to erode its dominance, and they want to topple iTunes, so they can get the pricing back under they’re control.

So the next time you buy music online from Amazon, just remember that you giving more power to the record industry with every purchase, and taking power away from Apple.

Apple want to keep music prices cheap and consistent, the record companies want you to pay more. Just remember that.




  1. wafflejuice

    Glad to see someone else thinking about this clearly. I’m tired of Leo Laporte and other pundits lavishing praise on Amazon MP3 and chiding Apple for not “fully abandoning DRM”. One need only look at the statements from the music cartels pre-Amazon about how they were upset that Apple wouldn’t allow them to charge more for music. It would raise red flags in any thinking person when they would allow competitors to sell their music for less and without DRM, knowing most people are going to say Apple is “dropping the ball”. The endgame is clearly to kill iTunes and be able to charge $5.00 a song or to only allow you to buy music in album bundles for $15 to $20. Pretty much the same tactics the movie studios are using in dragging their feet providing movies to iTunes to allow competitors to catch up knowing all the while people are going to blame Apple. As Mac users we should be used to the idea that saving money in the short term (with PC hardware) doesn’t mean you’re saving in the long run (security software and subscriptions, instability, lost productivity, frustration, etc.). This is no different.

  2. wafflejuice

    Case in point: Today the story broke that Microsoft was shutting down their authentication servers for “Plays For Sure” purchases, essentially leaving those customers out in the cold if they ever need to get a new computer or upgrade their OS. Yet somehow the comments on tech blogs and forums in response to the story keep bringing up Apple and iTunes. Assertions (based on nothing) that Apple will do the same thing and people rooting for Apple and iTunes to go under so DRM will die (ignoring the fact Apple would sell all their music DRM-free if the labels would let them as EMI and indies have). To recap MICROSOFT screws customers who bought into one of their abandoned DRM schemes and people say that’s a reason not to buy from iTunes. Makes perfect sense.

  3. Pingback: Still they don’t get it… « Tech Inertia

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s