Comments on: Why Apple Blew It With Its 99 Cent Per Ringtone Charge for the iPhone http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/ The technology resource you can't resist! Thu, 08 Jan 2009 13:41:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Leland http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-116076 Leland Sun, 09 Sep 2007 15:17:38 +0000 http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-116076 I flat-out refuse to buy ringtones from anybody. But -- being able to make your own, and for cheaper than anyone else? That's really not bad at all. Here's my question: If you want to edit or make a second ringtone out of a song, would you have to pay yet again, or are you basically buying the right to make as many different ringtones as you want from a single song? I flat-out refuse to buy ringtones from anybody.

But — being able to make your own, and for cheaper than anyone else? That’s really not bad at all.

Here’s my question: If you want to edit or make a second ringtone out of a song, would you have to pay yet again, or are you basically buying the right to make as many different ringtones as you want from a single song?

]]> By: Terrin http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115860 Terrin Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:17:31 +0000 http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115860 You guys have it all wrong. Apple is charging for ringtones because it doesn't own the rights to the music. The labels want their cut. Arguably allowing users to use their music as ringtones is a copyright violation. Charging for the rightones is just Apple's way of appeasing the labels. It could be argued that it isn't a copyright violation as well. Nonetheless, the labels are already not super happy with it. Now they will make a little more money from Apple. You guys have it all wrong. Apple is charging for ringtones because it doesn’t own the rights to the music. The labels want their cut. Arguably allowing users to use their music as ringtones is a copyright violation. Charging for the rightones is just Apple’s way of appeasing the labels. It could be argued that it isn’t a copyright violation as well. Nonetheless, the labels are already not super happy with it. Now they will make a little more money from Apple.

]]> By: johnmeister http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115811 johnmeister Fri, 07 Sep 2007 20:06:32 +0000 http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115811 You have answered yourself: "So why is Steve behind this? Well, there’s a new player in this game and it’s AT&T. Carriers make big money off of ringtones and this topic was sure to have come up with Apple when it brought it’s iPhone to then SBC with all of Apple’s demands. AT&T had a lot to lose and I’m sure ringtone revenue was not one thing it wanted to come out of its grips. Add in the evil record companies and you’re back to high pricing." That's where the blame lies, not with Apple. For example, when iTunes first came out, you could share your music library with the whole internet. Next version of iTunes limited to your subnet. Why? The music industry went ballistic with people listening to other libraries. They probably wanted music sharing eliminated completely. I am sure Apple held the line to limiting it to one subnet. In the same way, AT&T probably wanted to charge tons of money for ringtones. If it were up to apple, they would let you make ringtones. But I agree with you that AT&T wouldn't let that happen. So probably Apple managed to get it to be 99cents, as opposed to the $2.50 that Verizon charges. The battle against the music industry is done in increments. You fight the battles you can win. Right now, Apple needs as many supporters as possible. AT&T is a big one. You have answered yourself: “So why is Steve behind this? Well, there’s a new player in this game and it’s AT&T. Carriers make big money off of ringtones and this topic was sure to have come up with Apple when it brought it’s iPhone to then SBC with all of Apple’s demands. AT&T had a lot to lose and I’m sure ringtone revenue was not one thing it wanted to come out of its grips. Add in the evil record companies and you’re back to high pricing.”

That’s where the blame lies, not with Apple.

For example, when iTunes first came out, you could share your music library with the whole internet. Next version of iTunes limited to your subnet. Why? The music industry went ballistic with people listening to other libraries. They probably wanted music sharing eliminated completely. I am sure Apple held the line to limiting it to one subnet.

In the same way, AT&T probably wanted to charge tons of money for ringtones. If it were up to apple, they would let you make ringtones. But I agree with you that AT&T wouldn’t let that happen. So probably Apple managed to get it to be 99cents, as opposed to the $2.50 that Verizon charges.

The battle against the music industry is done in increments. You fight the battles you can win. Right now, Apple needs as many supporters as possible. AT&T is a big one.

]]> By: Sven Rafferty http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115808 Sven Rafferty Fri, 07 Sep 2007 19:51:07 +0000 http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115808 Because Apple has set precedent. With DRM-free EMI music and telling NBC Universal to walk. It was Apple that did this and yet while even Microsoft's own Windows Mobile easily allows you to add a ringtone - regardless of carrier - and it gets clobbered for all its ills, we're to ignore Apple's wrong doing here? I don't think so. Because Apple has set precedent. With DRM-free EMI music and telling NBC Universal to walk. It was Apple that did this and yet while even Microsoft’s own Windows Mobile easily allows you to add a ringtone - regardless of carrier - and it gets clobbered for all its ills, we’re to ignore Apple’s wrong doing here? I don’t think so.

]]> By: johnmeister http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115806 johnmeister Fri, 07 Sep 2007 19:44:00 +0000 http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115806 Why are we blaming Apple for what is industry practice? EVERYONE charges for ringtones. You expect Apple to give them away for free? At 99cents, they are cheaper than Verizon or Tmobile. Why are we blaming Apple for what is industry practice? EVERYONE charges for ringtones. You expect Apple to give them away for free? At 99cents, they are cheaper than Verizon or Tmobile.

]]> By: Sven Rafferty http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115794 Sven Rafferty Fri, 07 Sep 2007 18:36:30 +0000 http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115794 Jade, you pay twice for the song. 99 cents for the song to listen to and again another 99 cents for your ringtone. Yes, if you have prior purchases, you only pay the 99 cents for the ringtone. But didn't you pay for that prior song when you downloaded it from iTunes? Yes. So it is a double charge. Macworld has an excellent <a href="http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/09/04/livecoverage/index.php?lsrc=mwrss" rel="nofollow">picture of this</a> with Steve in the foreground. Note the "$1.98 you get both!!" line at the bottom of the slide. Jade, you pay twice for the song. 99 cents for the song to listen to and again another 99 cents for your ringtone. Yes, if you have prior purchases, you only pay the 99 cents for the ringtone. But didn’t you pay for that prior song when you downloaded it from iTunes? Yes. So it is a double charge.

Macworld has an excellent picture of this with Steve in the foreground. Note the “$1.98 you get both!!” line at the bottom of the slide.

]]> By: Darryl http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115778 Darryl Fri, 07 Sep 2007 17:41:18 +0000 http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115778 Sven, Have to agree with you on the double charge. I don't propose to defend Apple in any way but, there are 2 points that have to be considered when looking at this as an option. 1) I would propose that the second charge comes as a result of the content owners (music labels) requiring. I don't know if this is true but, with the profit Apple makes on downloads, it make little sense to build this bad pr will with customers over such a small amount. Another indicator that the record labels are behind this is because the entire catalogue isn't available as a ringtone. If it was under Apple's control, why would they limit access to the entire music library? 2) Even with an additional .99 charge, ringtones through iTunes are still less than $2.50, which has been the mobile industry standard price for years. Even with those considerations I think that it looks bad for Apple because most will not consider those points. (Your post is proof of that.) Those things being said, I wouldn't put it past Apple to have consider this another revenue stream. Sven,
Have to agree with you on the double charge. I don’t propose to defend Apple in any way but, there are 2 points that have to be considered when looking at this as an option.
1) I would propose that the second charge comes as a result of the content owners (music labels) requiring. I don’t know if this is true but, with the profit Apple makes on downloads, it make little sense to build this bad pr will with customers over such a small amount. Another indicator that the record labels are behind this is because the entire catalogue isn’t available as a ringtone. If it was under Apple’s control, why would they limit access to the entire music library?
2) Even with an additional .99 charge, ringtones through iTunes are still less than $2.50, which has been the mobile industry standard price for years.

Even with those considerations I think that it looks bad for Apple because most will not consider those points. (Your post is proof of that.)
Those things being said, I wouldn’t put it past Apple to have consider this another revenue stream.

]]> By: Marcos http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115776 Marcos Fri, 07 Sep 2007 17:34:10 +0000 http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115776 Well, the fact these ringtones are only available on 500,000 of the what - 2 or 3 million songs available on iTunes tells you this is not Apple's bright idea. This is the record industry, which thinks it should be able to sell you a song - well probably every time you listen to it - but certainly when it's a "ring tone" rather than just a song you listen to otherwise. They've been pulling this stunt for years, charging people crazy prices for ringtones (with help from the phone industry.) It's a total scam, but I Apple just wants you to buy the iPhone, and this is them appeasing the music industry and/or possibly AT&T. Well, the fact these ringtones are only available on 500,000 of the what - 2 or 3 million songs available on iTunes tells you this is not Apple’s bright idea. This is the record industry, which thinks it should be able to sell you a song - well probably every time you listen to it - but certainly when it’s a “ring tone” rather than just a song you listen to otherwise. They’ve been pulling this stunt for years, charging people crazy prices for ringtones (with help from the phone industry.)

It’s a total scam, but I Apple just wants you to buy the iPhone, and this is them appeasing the music industry and/or possibly AT&T.

]]> By: Jade http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115775 Jade Fri, 07 Sep 2007 17:18:25 +0000 http://svenontech.com/2007/09/07/why-apple-blew-it-with-its-99-cent-per-ringtone-charge-for-the-iphone/#comment-115775 "I mean, if you already purchased a song prior, you have to purchase it AGAIN! " No, you don't. You can use songs from your own library and only pay the ringtone fee. That's exactly what he said in the keynote. He even used Aretha's "respect" as an example. “I mean, if you already purchased a song prior, you have to purchase it AGAIN! ”
No, you don’t. You can use songs from your own library and only pay the ringtone fee. That’s exactly what he said in the keynote. He even used Aretha’s “respect” as an example.

]]>