
Lefsetz Letter - Apple/EMI/DRM - "Why the fuck should they cost more?" - jamiequint
http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/index.php/archives/2007/04/02/appleemidrm/
======
shsung
What an angry letter. They upped the quality of the music and charged a little
more for it, there's nothing wrong with that. They charge what they think the
market is willing to bear, not what it might be "truly worth." A Louis Vuitton
bag costs a whole lot less to make than to sell, but prices will never go
down, because that's what people are willing to pay.

If others join in to compete in the DRMless music wave, then at best we can
hope it will drive the price down. That's competition at its best, an effort
to capture the market by constantly producing something better OR cheaper (and
not necessarily both). At the very least, you're getting something better.

------
mattjaynes
It would have been lame if they had just removed the DRM and upped the price -
but the fact that they also _doubled_ the audio quality is probably a good-
will move to give the user additional value for the cost. The new audio files
will be 256kbps instead of the current 128kbps - most folks are forgetting
this in their analysis of the pricing.

And seriously - I think I've been spoiled reading pg articles. It feels like
this guy's yelling and spitting on you as you read it, blah.

------
domp
Once they start giving the artist's a bigger cut of the prices then I'll start
to care. Right now 35% is going towards Apple, and I'm sure EMI is seeing
about 70% of each sale. I couldn't care less if EMI and Apple make more money
off of their artists and consumers. The whole DRM thing was bound to fail
anyways.

~~~
greendestiny
What I don't understand is why we treat artists like retards. They don't need
to be saved from themselves and they enter into these deals more than
willingly. Artists like to pretend that they are at the mercy of the labels
whilst supporting the system.

~~~
domp
The reason is because there was no other outlet that had the ability to make
them rich and famous overnight. The major labels controlled all of the media
outlets until the internet came along.

Nowadays hardly any band would choose a major label over a large independent.
There is no benefits anymore. Anyone can reach that critical mass of users
without having to use Rolling Stone or MTV.

The people that sign to major labels, for the most part, want to be rich and
famous. They aren't trying to make a career out of their music but more a
career out of themselves. If not then they would be playing a local club in
New Hampshire on the weekends.

So, in my opinion, it's more about the artists being retards. They see that
major labels are a fast track to millions of records being sold. They don't
want to spend years in clubs to gain traction. They don't want to sell CDs out
of their cars. They don't want to save up to produce their own record. They
want to take the easy way out and have someone else do the work. It is their
own fault for signing a major label contract that takes advantage of them. If
they are incapable of seeing better outlets for their music then they deserve
to deal with the horrible circumstances of being on a big label.

Sorry this is so long.

------
greendestiny
So for years people have begged for DRMless music, because they want it more
than DRM'd music. If thats true then they'll pay more, competition with other
DRMless sources will hopefully eventually drive down the price.

------
nirs
Better product, higher price?

~~~
JMiao
Not really considering they're finally giving users something that should have
been established day 1.

~~~
nirs
So you agree with me - this is a better product :-)

