Universal declines 2-year iTunes contract

[delish]

So since Universal is HD DVD only, could this mean macs gets Blu-Ray drives soon?

 

Edit found a more accurate source:

Universal declines 2-year iTunes contract

Universal Music has declined to ink a 2-year contract with Apple to keep its vast catalog of tracks on the Cupertino-based company's iTunes Music Store, but has agreed instead to offer its tracks on a month-to-month basis.

source

[johan]

source ?

[delish]

source article I read, found this that seems more accurate MacNN article edited main post accordingly

[EFI]

1. Universal is pointing the gun at themselves in doing this move

2. Apple barely makes any profit from iTunes

3. iTunes (Apple) at 10% of people who put songs on MP3 players is not even remotely close to having a market dominance...so I have no clue why Universal is worried about Apple getting a stronghold. I think they are confusing the dominance of iPod vs the amount of songs ON the ipod that actually comes from iTunes....which on average...is next to nothing for many if not most people.

 

my 0.02 cents.

[bxsci(macuser)]

well.... we all know that the only reason disney has so much stuff on there is because Jobs is the largest shareholder

it is a bad move by universal... ut maybe they are simply anti-internet downloading in any way.. like metalica

[Urbz]

universal is very wierd...

they seem very stubborn and uptight about things.

Looks like they're scared of admitting defeat... first HD-DVD (which is dying...) and now not signing a contract? I don't get it :S

[bwhsh8r]

1. Universal is pointing the gun at themselves in doing this move

2. Apple barely makes any profit from iTunes

3. iTunes (Apple) at 10% of people who put songs on MP3 players is not even remotely close to having a market dominance...so I have no clue why Universal is worried about Apple getting a stronghold. I think they are confusing the dominance of iPod vs the amount of songs ON the ipod that actually comes from iTunes....which on average...is next to nothing for many if not most people.

 

my 0.02 cents.

HAHAHHAHA, artests get like 3 cents.... to 10 cents per 99 cent song, apple makes most of the profit. do your research and if you buy a cd it costs just about as much, except a physical cd doesnt have drm (allmost all of it....) has a higher bitrate, and a physical copy.

 

& universal isnot "pointing the gun at themselves"

 

theyre just saying that they dont want to be bound to selling their stuff in itunes.... apple will let them stay there as long as they want.

[EFI]

HAHAHHAHA, artests get like 3 cents.... to 10 cents per 99 cent song, apple makes most of the profit. do your research and if you buy a cd it costs just about as much, except a physical cd doesnt have drm (allmost all of it....) has a higher bitrate, and a physical copy.

 

& universal isnot "pointing the gun at themselves"

 

theyre just saying that they dont want to be bound to selling their stuff in itunes.... apple will let them stay there as long as they want.

 

You are flat out wrong.

 

iTunes, when an indivual purchases a song, only receives a portion of that 99 cents towards Apple. Artists receive anywhere from 8 to 14 cents...not the 3 to 10 cents that you say. Apple makes 33 cents of the transaction, and the rest 52 cents goes towards the music label...in this case Universal. Therfore, Apple does not make most of the profits, contrary to what you say. Perhaps you should do YOUR research before you post bogus numbers.

 

And yes, universal is pointing the gun at themselves because up to now their primary and most sold outlet was through iTunes. This does not mean they dont sell through other outlets, as they do with Rhapsody, Real, and phsical store outlets. However with iTunes having 70% of the online digital music purchases...they are literally turning down the largest online music retailer. This, in essence, is shooting themselves.

 

When was the last time an individual went all the way to a wal-mart store to purchase a 50-cent album? Long, long time ago I would say. I doubt this would prove sustainable in the long run for Universal. iTunes has HELPED universal if anything...not the other way around. Instead Universal *thinks* that by selling their music on players like the Zune (without even going into DRM talking), that they would have a better chance of lowering this so called non-existent "monopoly" that Apple has.

[articquad]

Yeah, word to the post above me.

 

The only reason apple has the store is not to make money, as I doubt they make more than a cent per song/movie/tv show.

 

It's just to promote the ipod + phoneeee.

[A Nonny Moose]

Universal is marketing at will:

 

Linky loo

 

This means they are putting some of their offerings on iTunes, but not all of it. Most likely, they'll be going to Wal-Mart music, since we all know about THEIR strong-arm tactics...

[EFI]

since we all know about THEIR strong-arm tactics...

 

Yep, lower prices...lower them some more...and then again some more...until one of those candy machines (25 cents) become more expensive. I used to like wal-mart...but now they're cheap as heck. Their retail strategies (purchasing from a wholesaler) have become very shady these days.

[apowerr]

When was the last time an individual went all the way to a wal-mart store to purchase a 50-cent album? Long, long time ago I would say.

Agreed. 50 Cent sucks so bad.