RSS
Putting Music On A Phone Doesn't Make It 50% More Valuable
from the must-be-some-of-that-new-math dept
It's pretty clear that mobile music downloads are going to have a hard time if carriers don't change their pricing plans. They assume that they can charge a premium -- and people will pay it -- over PC downloads simply because they're able to download songs from anywhere. That's a faulty assumption though, with one analyst study pointing out people's interest in downloading songs on their PC declined 58% when the price went from 99 cents to $1.49. People's interest in music phones thus far is on models that sync to PCs, since the internet-connected computer, not the mobile phone, is the predominant hub for people's digital entertainment. It's hard to see consumers changing their buying habits -- and spending more money -- just to download songs when they're not in front of a PC.
3 Comments | Leave a Comment..
- Beastie Boy Mike D Forces AT&T To Let Shareholders Vote On Net Neutrality
- Congress Trying To Regulate Certain Wireless Spectrum Issues... In A Payroll Tax Bill?
- Verizon Wireless: Paying Online Is More Convenient, So Now You Have To Pay $2 To Do So [Updated]
- Is Verizon Wireless Violating Its Promise To Be Open By Blocking Google Wallet?
- Innovation In Wireless: The Disruption In Connectivity
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
No Subject Given
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Ringback Rip-Offs
I think ringback tones are an interesting idea, but I refuse to pay that much for them. Given that iTunes doesn't charge any per month fee and only charges $0.99 per song for life, the economics don't make sense.
And that's to say nothing about the fact that your callers won't likely ever hear the full song (you'll probably answer the phone or voicemail will before the song is anywhere near done). If you're only purchasing song clips, that makes the price even more ridiculous.
If Verizon would offer the songs for $0.49 per year, that might not be so bad (even with the $0.99 per month charge). Alternatively, if they charged $2.00 per month for the service and you got unlimited free access to ringback tones, even that might not be so bad (assuming you wanted to give each caller their own ringback tone).
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment