Music

TOPICS:

4/10/04
4/10/04
4/9/04

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

318 | 319 | 320

 ... 453

Next

AceTracer

AceTracer

Hollywood, FL
January 2004

APR 09, 2004 01:13 PM

Many would say 99 cents is a steep price to pay for one song, especially when you start buying in mass quantities. Apparently the music labels feel the exact opposite...





The Wall Street Journal reports that the major five labels think that 99 cents per song is too cheap, and are discussing a price hike that would increase the tariff to $1.25 up to $2.99 per song.





Just when you thought the music industry had finally learned to be reasonable. Get the full story from The Register

endlessben

endlessben

Grand Rapids, MI
November 2003

APR 09, 2004 01:14 PM

You know, I would buy from iTunes all day if the songs were cheaper, like 50-75 cents a song.

thunderbolts

thunderbolts

Toronto, ON
February 2004

APR 09, 2004 01:20 PM

hehehe that will just force people to be more resourceful in their file sharing. a fine acomplishment.

Chest_Rockwell

Chest_Rockwell

Los Angeles, CA
March 2004

APR 09, 2004 01:25 PM

Speaking as a person who works in the music industry; the music industry is full of idiots and this is just the latest prime example. mad

TheAngus

TheAngus

Raleigh, NC
January 2004

APR 09, 2004 02:02 PM

agreed, I also work in the music industry, luckily for me and my kind, they all feel that file sharing should be free.

zarco

zarco

Jamison, PA
April 2003

APR 09, 2004 02:32 PM

They think I'm paying more then .99 per song they can bite me. Most songs aren't worth that much.

artchick

artchick

United Kingdom
August 2003

APR 09, 2004 03:01 PM

Wow. They're lame.

thefuckingdaddy

thefuckingdaddy

Burkina Faso
August 2003

APR 09, 2004 03:40 PM

Okay, so since COCK E.S.P. have upwards to 99 tracks on one of their cds does that mean it would cost 100 dollars?

(that Dale Earnhardt collectible plate better increase in value or I wont be hearing ANY new music.)

CokeConfessional

CokeConfessional

Belleville, NJ
March 2004

APR 09, 2004 04:10 PM

Oh Soulseek, how I love thee...

ofthedead

ofthedead

Dallas, TX
February 2004

APR 09, 2004 06:12 PM

This is so fucking typical.

First people start stealing music (in large part) because the industry charges way too much for CDs, then the industry stops being stupidly stubborn and realizes it must adopt this new technology, then it goes and makes exactly the same fucking mistake again! Way to learn, jackballs!

[Edited on Apr 09, 2004 by ofthedead]

JumpinJackShit

JumpinJackShit

Las Vegas, NV
March 2004

APR 09, 2004 06:17 PM

AceTracer said:
Many would say 99 cents is a steep price to pay for one song, especially when you start buying in mass quantities. Apparently the music labels feel the exact opposite...


The Wall Street Journal reports that the major five labels think that 99 cents per song is too cheap, and are discussing a price hike that would increase the tariff to $1.25 up to $2.99 per song.



Just when you thought the music industry had finally learned to be reasonable. Get the full story from The Register



The music industry, by nature, will NEVER, EVER be reasonable. This comes as absolutely NO surprise to me. It's exactly what I've come to expect from those greedy pigfuckers.

Keep supporting P2P file-sharing, I say... and I'm a musician to boot.

Valen

Valen

Manhattan, KS
January 2004

APR 10, 2004 06:04 AM

Are they trying to force people to steal the music?!?!?! Someone needs to give the lable heads a class in Economics 101.

FallFromGrace

FallFromGrace

Seattle, WA
March 2004

APR 10, 2004 06:08 AM

greed makes the world go 'round.