[Hands0n]

Good Lord! If this is true then my own personal dreams will be realised. I have a distinct hate of DRM in all of its forms. I also have strong feelings about why we are charged £0.79p per track in the UK iTunes and the Americans are only charged $0.69c - some rubbish about exchange rates, cross border charges, import/export costs ... all the usual flim-flam that we get poured over us whenever we have the audacity to ask why we are paying more than anyone else!

So, have a read of what Peter Jenner has to say, see if you agree or not.

Full Article: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/03/peter_jenner/



Few people know the music industry better than Peter Jenner. Pink Floyd's first manager, who subsequently managed Syd Barrett's solo career, Jenner has also looked after T.Rex, The Clash, Ian Dury, Disposable Heroes and Billy Bragg - who he manages today. He's also secretary general of the International Music Managers Forum.

And he doesn't pull his punches.

The major four music labels today are "****ed", he says. Digital music pricing has been a scam where the consumer pays for manufacturing, distribution, and does all the work - and still has to pay more. Labels should outsource everything except finance and licensing.

But he's also optimistic that for almost everyone else - indie labels, musicians, songwriters and budding entrepreneurs - as well as network providers - the future's going to be pretty bright. The Big Four know that the DRM era is nearly over - and within two or three years, he predicts, "most countries" in the world will have a blanket licensing regime where we exchange music freely, for a couple of quid a month.

In the future, he also suggests, artists, co-ops and managers will raise their own investment on behalf of artists - and pick and choose their marketing teams.

Jenner is organising a conference in London on November 15 to discuss these issues. Billed as an "Urgent Blue Sky Debate", for once a music event may live up to its billing. Earlier this year, France almost voted to legalise P2P and bring in a blanket license - the necessary stepping stone to the future.

While Jenner elaborated on these in a report for MusicTank recently - it's only available to the public for a fee. So we were delighted when he dropped by Vulture Central yesterday to lift the lid on the business. Strong language follows.

Continued in main article here --> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/03/peter_jenner/

[Ben]

Oo, I like his concept, it'd definitely be a preferable mechanism for paying royalties, though someone would still need to keep track of who's getting what so the correct artists can be reimbursed - and that's going to require some kind of DRM/reporting/evesdropping.

[bsrjl1]

99c in the US iTunes store actually. But it still works out more than 79p.

[Hands0n]

I did a quick check on the Currency Calculator using the rates that are published today on XE.Com's Universal Currency Convertor (http://www.xe.com/ucc/convert.cgi) (where currently USD 1.00 = GBP 0.52 [rounded]).

The iTunes price of $0.99 per track equates to the UK GBP price of £0.52, almost half what we pay! Album prices are $9.99 which equates to GBP £5.25 while the UK price of an album on iTunes is £7.90 (although prices can vary depending on the album).

None of this is quite equitable when considering that the "store" is one entity, where they get the price differentials is beyond reasonable.

Footnote:
Apple, with iTunes, is trying to charge what the UK market will stand. They are already seeing that it does not work, given the small number of iPod owners who buy iTunes music, something less than 30%. That leave the huge bulk of iPod owners getting their music from other sources, or only subscribing to free content such as Podcasts. This is hardly going to make iTunes the golden goose that Apple may have hope for. And consider that iTunes is the largest and most successful pay-for music resource on the net today. The others are all trailing along behind.

[Ben]

Including VAT, that £0.52 is £0.61. Ok, there's still 9p out per track which is too much, but without knowing what sales taxes apply to Apple's iTunes service I assume that VAT at least counts for some of the difference.

[bsrjl1]

But Apple's plan isn't to sell music, on which they just about make a small profit of a couple pennies per song. It's to lock people into their iPod, on which they make a lot of money. They don't care if you buy from the store, rip your cds or otherwise. They've already got your money!

[Hands0n]

Thats true enough, mostly imo.

But Apple have placed themselves in the music retail business with the iTunes Store. They could have taken the approach of all those that went before and just launch the iPod hardware and iTunes management application. That is, after all, how more than 70% of iPod users use the system, to RIP and manage their libraries, hardly ever, if at all, going to the iTunes Store to purchase music.

I wonder, also, if they truly do not care - they make a good amount of money from iTunes, certainly sufficient to warrant keeping the Store going. And if the various media reports and presentations are correct they [Apple] are doing their own research to find out why people are not buying more. Why they are not availing themselves of iTunes Store. If Apple truly did not care, why would they bother even asking. Just leave things be and be happy with the ~30% who do buy. It is [for Apple] money for nothing after all.

But the point is, they are asking the difficult question.

[Hands0n]

Including VAT, that £0.52 is £0.61. Ok, there's still 9p out per track which is too much, but without knowing what sales taxes apply to Apple's iTunes service I assume that VAT at least counts for some of the difference.

The UK Apple Store states


Prices are inclusive of 17.5% VAT but exclusive of delivery charges (unless otherwise indicated).
The Order Form shows you the VAT payable on the Products you select.


The US Apple Store states


Electronic Software Download Sales Tax
Applicable sales tax will be charged for downloadable software purchases where required by local law in the jurisdiction where the purchaser reside


So thats all nice and clear then :p If I recall correctly NYC sales tax was 8%. But then they also levy State tax of a few % also.......!