I was thinking along that lines too, but in this case apple and their itunes music store are still a middle man in as much as a record label or distributor is a middle man. the artist who sells their wares through iTMS still only recieves a cut of the .99 cents per track just as they only receive a cut of the selling price regradless if its wholesale or retail from a 'hard copy' release. I would guess that the day isnt too far off when you see artists/labels selling their output direct to consumers online using a similar business plan, especially given the advent of technologies like final scratch. yes, there is somethng to be said for a slab of vinyl but the overheads and prfofit margins for establishing and operating a direct-dowload label would have to be better than for a traditional label I would think, even if only slightly, which still puts more money in the pocket of the artist/label owner.
personally, I know I much prefer being able to listen to the tracks on line from a 12" or LP and purchase only the ones I want at a buck a pop (see the poker flat web site) vice dropping $10 - $20 bucks for the actual release in a retail outlet for the other tracks I didn¹t want > From: Lester Kenyatta Spence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 09:32:15 -0400 (EDT) > To: 313@hyperreal.org > Subject: (313) was groovetech now itunes > > i think that dance music would be the perfect money maker for itunes. as > dj'ing moves away from vinyl, even those who are ideologically predisposed > to pay loot for tracks will find it a time-suck to continually buy tracks > then transform them to mp3. at a buck a pop, who'd fight it? > > lks > >
