[vikulenka]

Originally Posted by solaris

GOOD POST!!!?

Did you actually read it or did you just loosely run through it, Hirs? From the sound of it, I'm pretty sure you did the last - and then I'll forgive you for your above comment

Hey boys.... no fighting!

Unless it's over me, of course!

[Hirs Ute]

Originally Posted by solaris

GOOD POST!!!?

Did you actually read it or did you just loosely run through it, Hirs? From the sound of it, I'm pretty sure you did the last - and then I'll forgive you for your above comment

And a good afternoon to you too Solaris , I trust you slept well last night and are feeling sprightly today. Yes I did read stevenq's post in it's entirety before making my post.

My justification for praising his post is that, I believe, it acknowledges two, key, commercial realities, as distasteful as those realities are. Probably I should have made my reply a little more detailed at the time.

The first issue is the way the music company cartels, often, carve up artists in different global territories to enable a music company in the US, for example, access to a UK artist to maximise that artists exposure in that territory. Although this isn’t as common as it used to, due to music companies merging, it does end up with stupid contractual issues in that music company a) is willing to agree that Amazon, for example, can sell artist XYZ in one country (let’s say the US) but does not hold the rights to agree for Amazon to sell in another country (let’s say France). But, admittedly that's a bit of a side issue.

I believe the fundamental consideration, and maybe I am being extraordinarily naïve here, is that I do not believe a global retailer, such as Amazon, chooses to limit the sale of goods or services to a segment of the population. Amazon’s responsibility to its shareholders is to maximise turnover and, more importantly, profit. Amazon’s greatest capital investment is in building an infrastructure to make downloads available securely enough to meet the approval of the bloated music companies. The additional investment that would be necessary to roll the download service to their other businesses, globally, would be tiny by comparison.

Instead I blame the fat, greedy, basards of the music companies who are so desperate to hold onto an outdated business model and maintain regional pricing policies they will say to companies such as Amazon "if you want to get into the music download business you'll do it on our terms or not at all. “We will allow you to trial in the US and if you can satisfy us that you are taking good care of our profit then we'll let you roll the service out to other countries. “Remember, mind, that we'll want higher prices in Europe because those mugs over there don't mind parting with their cash"”.

I congratulated stevenq, on his post, because I believe he was trying to point out that, whilst it is indeed discriminating that, someone can download music from Amazon in the US they can’t in Europe but the blame does not lie at Amazon’s door but instead rests securely with music companies, their lawyers and the government members who are too dumb to think the argument through.

One day, in the not too distant future, (thinking about it probably a long time in the future as they are most likely waiting for the $USD to recover its strength ) Amazon will surely make downloads available in other countries but when that day comes the artists will still receive a pittance for each track downloaded. When that day comes the problem won’t have been solved it would merely have been perpetuated

The answer to all this isn’t to have loads of global organisations making downloads available with the main loser being the artist who will see their royalty ever dwindle. The answer is for more artists to make their music available, for download, directly to those people who directly consume the music and miss out the money grabbing music companies altogether. If an artist can’t afford to do it themselves (and I would suspect most of them can’t) then they should get together and establish a good old fashioned co-operative.

That’s my opinion anyway .

[mehrens2112]

A) shouldn't this topic be moved to the lounge?

B) solution is simple, if you really want the song and can't find it on the russian sites try buying the cd. iTunes and Amazon (or Walmart trying the same thing), will never get my money, at least not for MP3's/4's. I think I bought some music videos and movies off iTunes, but that is the extent of it. OR, the other solution is to write the customer support/help desk or whatever you want to call it and politely request they try and get the album you are looking for. I've gotten a lot of stuff that I was looking for just by doing that.

C) my best friend and his band are in the midst of signing a contract with a label and I sympathize with all the crap they are going through and how much "the labels" are hosing them and every other artist out there. Just like the oil companies...(oh wait, don't get me started on that one).

[solaris]

Originally Posted by Hirs Ute

And a good afternoon to you too Solaris , I trust you slept well last night and are feeling sprightly today. Yes I did read stevenq's post in it's entirety before making my post.

My justification for praising his post is that, I believe, it acknowledges two, key, commercial realities, as distasteful as those realities are. Probably I should have made my reply a little more detailed at the time.

The first issue is the way the music company cartels, often, carve up artists in different global territories to enable a music company in the US, for example, access to a UK artist to maximise that artists exposure in that territory. Although this isn’t as common as it used to, due to music companies merging, it does end up with stupid contractual issues in that music company a) is willing to agree that Amazon, for example, can sell artist XYZ in one country (let’s say the US) but does not hold the rights to agree for Amazon to sell in another country (let’s say France). But, admittedly that's a bit of a side issue.

I believe the fundamental consideration, and maybe I am being extraordinarily naïve here, is that I do not believe a global retailer, such as Amazon, chooses to limit the sale of goods or services to a segment of the population. Amazon’s responsibility to its shareholders is to maximise turnover and, more importantly, profit. Amazon’s greatest capital investment is in building an infrastructure to make downloads available securely enough to meet the approval of the bloated music companies. The additional investment that would be necessary to roll the download service to their other businesses, globally, would be tiny by comparison.

Instead I blame the fat, greedy, basards of the music companies who are so desperate to hold onto an outdated business model and maintain regional pricing policies they will say to companies such as Amazon "if you want to get into the music download business you'll do it on our terms or not at all. “We will allow you to trial in the US and if you can satisfy us that you are taking good care of our profit then we'll let you roll the service out to other countries. “Remember, mind, that we'll want higher prices in Europe because those mugs over there don't mind parting with their cash"”.

I congratulated stevenq, on his post, because I believe he was trying to point out that, whilst it is indeed discriminating that, someone can download music from Amazon in the US they can’t in Europe but the blame does not lie at Amazon’s door but instead rests securely with music companies, their lawyers and the government members who are too dumb to think the argument through.

One day, in the not too distant future, (thinking about it probably a long time in the future as they are most likely waiting for the $USD to recover its strength ) Amazon will surely make downloads available in other countries but when that day comes the artists will still receive a pittance for each track downloaded. When that day comes the problem won’t have been solved it would merely have been perpetuated

The answer to all this isn’t to have loads of global organisations making downloads available with the main loser being the artist who will see their royalty ever dwindle. The answer is for more artists to make their music available, for download, directly to those people who directly consume the music and miss out the money grabbing music companies altogether. If an artist can’t afford to do it themselves (and I would suspect most of them can’t) then they should get together and establish a good old fashioned co-operative.

That’s my opinion anyway .

Thanks, Hirs

I still think you (in the above stated) agree more with me than you intended to do from the beginning (it's called indoctrination ).

I wrote that I merely blamed the shop owners for not fighting back already (especially the giga sized ones like Amazon)(iTunes started out rejoicing DRM - but that was to protect their own interests - not the music company's).

[Hirs Ute]

Originally Posted by solaris

Thanks, Hirs

I still think you (in the above stated) agree more with me than you intended to do from the beginning (it's called indoctrination ).

I wrote that I merely blamed the shop owners for not fighting back already (especially the giga sized ones like Amazon)(iTunes started out rejoicing DRM - but that was to protect their own interests - not the music company's).

Sorry Solaris but I'm not convinced the shop owners aren't fighting back because they don't want to. Universal Pictures claim that they don't want to go down the iTunes route because Steve and the boys totally devalued the music business I think, to the music companies, that hurt and they are trying to be harder with new businesses that they sign up. Do you really believe that businesses like Amazon are limiting their sales to the US out of choice?

[Nightfly]

I do not use Amazon because of it's current Business model of having different
prices for different tracks and some are only available in album form.They are
a big Corp.who could care less about the customer.

It is my personal choice not to use them as well until they go globally.Any site
that excludes my fellow members here.I will not use.No not to deep,but it's
simple enough reason for me.I also use Last.fm because it lets all the world
in, while Pandora only does the US.As a US citizen no reason for me to be isolated.
And how am I to learn about the new releases from all around the world, if I
look so narrowly at the world.

[chris7]

Originally Posted by Dave C

Rant Warning
I wait to see what will happen with amazonmp3 when it comes to the UK, but I really hope they do not go down the route of itunes / emusic where everyone in the UK get screwed over the cost of the downloads. Non of the Russian site charge us twice what it costs people in the USA to download music, so why do itunes & emusic? The answer to that question is obvious; because they know customers in the UK are used to paying inflated prices so they continue to rip us off. I know I should protest at this in the only sensible way by not using these sites (certainly the case with itunes), but emusic is good enough for me to get off my moral high ground
Cheers,
Dave C

Good post Dave, the one reason I will not give my money to them either, as you say at least with the Russian shops we are all charged the same low price. We in the UK are not used to that and finding cheap music via this site was a great feeling, long may it continue.

[Hirs Ute]

Originally Posted by Dave C

Rant Warning
I wait to see what will happen with amazonmp3 when it comes to the UK, but I really hope they do not go down the route of itunes / emusic where everyone in the UK get screwed over the cost of the downloads. Non of the Russian site charge us twice what it costs people in the USA to download music, so why do itunes & emusic? The answer to that question is obvious; because they know customers in the UK are used to paying inflated prices so they continue to rip us off. I know I should protest at this in the only sensible way by not using these sites (certainly the case with itunes), but emusic is good enough for me to get off my moral high ground
Cheers,
Dave C

Maybe I'm suffering from Bitemporal hemianopsia but I believe it's the music cartels who press the music stores as to how they price in different territories. You're damn right that European consumers get the bum end of the deal but I'm not convinced it's all the fault of the retailers.

In my simplistic business model I would prefer to make 10 cents profit on 100,000 downloads rather than 20 cents on, say, 35,000.

[Starcat]

Originally Posted by Dave C

Rant Warning
I wait to see what will happen with amazonmp3 when it comes to the UK, but I really hope they do not go down the route of itunes / emusic where everyone in the UK get screwed over the cost of the downloads. Non of the Russian site charge us twice what it costs people in the USA to download music, so why do itunes & emusic? The answer to that question is obvious; because they know customers in the UK are used to paying inflated prices so they continue to rip us off. I know I should protest at this in the only sensible way by not using these sites (certainly the case with itunes), but emusic is good enough for me to get off my moral high ground
Cheers,
Dave C

Agree with you there, Dave.

Hats off to the Russian sites for having no regional or global restrictions, and for charging everyone the same price, wherever they live.
Long may their business model thrive and prosper. It is refreshing here in the UK to not be over-charged.

Whatever the reasoning behind it, it makes no sense in today`s so-called global economy for major companies to exclude vast swathes of the world`s population.

[solaris]

Originally Posted by Hirs Ute

Maybe I'm suffering from Bitemporal hemianopsia but I believe it's the music cartels who press the music stores as to how they price in different territories. You're damn right that European consumers get the bum end of the deal but I'm not convinced it's all the fault of the retailers.

In my simplistic business model I would prefer to make 10 cents profit on 100,000 downloads rather than 20 cents on, say, 35,000.

Hirs, how long do you think this 'war' would last, if Amazon/iTunes/OD2 and all the other major online sellers put their feet firmly to the ground and told the major record companies that they wanted to do the right thing and treat all their potential customers around the world equally (and at the same time told them to stick DRM way up there, where the sun doesn't shine)?

It wouldn't last a month before The Big Four would bend over and reveal The Big 0 as a sign of surrender