iTunes downloads: too ££?

[MajorFubar]

I'm not a download person.

Stuff that I want to listen to but I don't want to own = Spotify.

Stuff that I want to listen to and own = CD.

Now and again though, there are certain albums where I fancy a SQ which is 'one up from Spotify' but I'm not *that* concerned about having 'CD-quality' SQ. That's technically got iTunes written all over it. But here's the rub: nearly every time, I can buy the CD cheaper.

Perfect example was just now: for a reason I cannot explain, I was tempted to go hunting for Spark To A Flame by Chris De Burgh. I'm not a huge fan, but this 'best of' does tempt me. So I scoured iTunes: £5.99, which is not a bad price. But still, I couldn't help checking the price of the CD on eBay: £4.50 from a trader, brand new, sealed & delivered.

Considering that the CD stands a better chance of having a superior SQ to start with, I just can't find myself handing over more money just for the sake of having a compressed version immediately.

The only thing I can see iTunes is better value for is single tracks, most of which are 99p a shot.

Am I missing the point?

 

[bigboss]

It's the convenience you pay for. Besides, iTunes will exploit its reputation and popularity. I have seen ebooks being more expensive than paperbacks.

 

[Chisy1]

I also don't understand why downloads are more expensive, other than people are willing to pay for some kind of instant enjoyment. Movies are the same, if you can wait a few days the BD movie will be better quality than iTunes HD download and will often be cheaper too.

Convenience versus (slightly lower) quality, obviously a lot of consumers prefer the former

 

[Chisy1]

It's the convenience you pay for. Besides, iTunes will exploit its reputation and popularity. I have seen ebooks being more expensive than paperbacks.

Bigboss you beat me by 1 minute, you made your point much more succinctly though

 

[MajorFubar]

It's frustrating really. I won't pretend that I even begin to know the true costs of online hosting and streaming from a provider's perspective, but common sense tells me it should be cheaper than the cost of manufacturing, packaging, distributing and posting a physical item.

 

[6th.replicant]

Indeed. And as for the price of hi-res downloads... |(

 

[whoam1]

It's the convenience you pay for. Besides, iTunes will exploit its reputation and popularity. I have seen ebooks being more expensive than paperbacks.

ebooks are liable for VAT whereas printed books are not.

 

[MajorFubar]

I can kind of forgive that, to an extent; I would expect to pay a premium to download something with a potentially-superior SQ to physical CD, even if the cost of hosting it and streaming it is no greater than a CD-quality stream. But paying more to download a compressed version just goes against my grain.

 

[professorhat]

It's frustrating really. I won't pretend that I even begin to know the true costs of online hosting and streaming from a provider's perspective, but common sense tells me it should be cheaper than the cost of manufacturing, packaging, distributing and posting a physical item.

It's not (not for music and movies anyway - not 100% about books, but I'd imagine it's the same).

Imagine the cost of creating and maintaining a large data centre (which in itself is millions of pounds), then filling this with the approriate IT infrastructure (i.e. firewalls, switches, servers, storage, etc. - all of which will need to be enterprise class and thus probably 10 times minimum the cost of consumer versions). Now secure this to ensure it can't be tampered with (both physically and via the network), plus keeping it going (air conditioning, electricity, onsite support and security personnel). Now add business continuity / disaster recovery solutions which require at least one duplicate of the entire infrastructure in a completely geographically separate location and requires an extremely fast connection between them to ensure up to date replication of data. Finally, add a massive connection to the internet to enable the number of simultaneous downloads you're likely to be dealing with. And then add in all the costs I've not thought about cos I've listed this really quickly (project management, architecture, building facilities, HR etc.) and you've got yourself a lot of money.

Plus you'd probably pay a few people like me for about 2 - 3 months of work just to design the above on paper (let alone actually implement it)

 

[tino]

Can't see the point of iTunes downloads myself ... More expensive, inferior quality, rights restricted (maybe?), can't resell or leave to your kids, lousy client software ... Oh well you do save on shelving I suppose ...

 

[professorhat]

BTW - I agree with you. I buy CDs for the same reason.

 

[Paul.]

Don't see the point in buying CD's on eBay. The artist recieves no money, so no better than pirating it.

 

[daveh75]

Don't see the point in buying CD's on eBay. The artist recieves no money, so no better than pirating it.

But they would have done from the original purchase.

 

[Paul.]

Don't see the point in buying CD's on eBay. The artist recieves no money, so no better than pirating it.

But they would have done from the original purchase.

As they would have gotten money from the chap who uploaded the CD to the internet. Doesn't give me the right to listen to it.

 

[MajorFubar]

Don't see the point in buying CD's on eBay. The artist recieves no money, so no better than pirating it.

WTF? How you work that one out? If you buy second hand from eBay, then the original purchaser paid fair and square for it. If you buy new & sealed from a trader (who presumably hasn't stole it), then it's no different from buying online from HMV or anywhere else.

 

[Paul.]

Im not saying its illegal, I just personally believe its pointless to buy second hand music. I want the artist to get paid. If I buy second hand, the artist does not get paid for my listening to their work. The first guy paid for the right to listen to the music, I have not. Simple.

 

[MajorFubar]

Im not saying its illegal, I just personally believe its pointless to buy second hand music. I want the artist to get paid. If I buy second hand, the artist does not get paid for my listening to their work. The first guy paid for the right to listen to the music, I have not. Simple.

Fair enough but it's still not like pirating. There's quite a big difference. Before eBay and the internet, didn't you ever go to a second-hand record-shop or a car boot sale and buy used records/CDs/tapes? By selling-on the CD/record/tape the original purchaser has relinquished their right to own the album and passed it to you. In effect they paid the artists rights on your behalf, and the artist hasn't lost out because still only one copy of the album has been sold. That's the huge, very critical difference between re-selling and pirating that I think you need to understand.

 

[Paul.]

Fair enough but it's still not like pirating. There's quite a big difference.

I fail to see the distinction. At least if someone pirates, there is a chance of them loving the music and then going and buying a legitimate CD. If you buy the music secondhand, the artist makes no money. Again, not saying you are doing anything wrong, I just don't see the point in second hand music.

Before eBay and the internet, didn't you ever go to a second-hand record-shop or a car boot sale and buy used records/CDs/tapes?

Only for deleted music. I did go through a frustrated period at uni. I got fed up with buying so many CD's that were rubbish, so would copy from mates and then buy if it was worthy of my cash. Now with iTunes, spotify and youtube there is not really an excuse for that.

 

[Paul.]

By selling-on the CD/record/tape the original purchaser has relinquished their right to own the album and passed it to you. In effect they paid the artists rights on your behalf, and the artist hasn't lost out because still only one copy of the album has been sold. That's the huge, very critical difference between re-selling and pirating that I think you need to understand.

Again, not saying you are doing anything wrong, but if someone creates something, you pay for the experience of it, you never own the rights to it. If you get bored of it, I don't think its right for someone else to get it for free, they too should reward the creator.

 

[MajorFubar]

I fail to see the distinction

Paul, if you can't see the difference, I can't help you. When I buy used records, CDs and tapes - so long as they are originals of course - my conscience is clear. The buyer has passed on their right to own the album quite legitimately to the new buyer, the very same copy of the very same album has just simply been passed on to a new keeper, and the artist, record-company, media-manufacturer, distributor and original retailer are no worse off nor better off than if the original buyer had just kept it. Nothing immoral has taken place.

I do respect your choice to only buy new music, and I respect your reasons, but I don't respect even so much the slightest hint of a suggestion that buying used media is at all like pirating. You need to recognise the difference.

 

[Paul.]

I'm not questioning the legality of buying second hand music, it's very simple to grasp. It's also very simple to grasp that piracy and second hand music has the same net gain for the artist. We seem to be arguing diferent points. I'm not claiming that second hand music buying is the same as piracy, because I am not claiming second hand music buying is illegal. I undersrand your point about transfer of ownership. I am only stating I think it to be pointless, and no better for the artist than piracy in terms of their personal gain. Hopefully this makes clear my point.

 

[bigboss]

My understanding is, if I buy a second hand CD, I have purchased the rights to listen to the music as well. It's up to the conscience of the seller to not copy it in his/her computer before selling on, not mine.

 

[MajorFubar]

I'm not claiming that second hand music buying is the same as piracy

Well you are Paul, in fact that was the crux of your very first post in the thread. Allow me to quote it for you:

Don't see the point in buying CD's on eBay. The artist recieves no money, so no better than pirating it.

Truth is if you want my opinion you realised you made a stupid statement that you didn't think through before hitting 'submit' and you've been trying to dig yourself out of it since, especially when your original last post on the first page actually said "sorry I thought you were talking about used CDs", or something similar, and you edited it within seconds...

Anyhow...what's the chance of this thread veering back on track and discussing the prices of iTunes downloads...

 

[Paul.]

Sorry, didn't realise "no better" = "the same". This is boiling down to an Lhc style debate about semantics. Yawn.

I did edit because i misread your statement (you edited too,making me post twice cos you wanted to clarify your statement. Who cares?) but the fundamentals of my point remain the same. I'm not trying to win something here, try re-reading my posts without the assumption I'm 'digging myself out of something' and they should seem reasonable.

 

[Anonymous]

So buy the second hand CD then send all the money you saved off the price of a new one to the artist. Their cut of the total money you spend will be much bigger that way too.