Beatles on iTunes, please to explain
Controller_7
4,052 Posts
Why is apple putting so much money unto this? I understand it's a big catalog and a money maker, but why the huge push? Will it generate enough revenue to justify a billboard every 5 miles. I saw two billboards on 101 today, about 300 feet apart, both visible at the same time, just one on the left side of the freeway and one on the right.
I guess my question is, why would anyone care? It's all been available for decades and there has been almost no limitation in access to this content. I'm just confused because apple is pushing it just as hard as they did the iPad. Pushing the iPad makes sense, but pushing something they had no part in creating and everybody on the planet has already heard and, for many people, owned.
I so confused. :/
I guess my question is, why would anyone care? It's all been available for decades and there has been almost no limitation in access to this content. I'm just confused because apple is pushing it just as hard as they did the iPad. Pushing the iPad makes sense, but pushing something they had no part in creating and everybody on the planet has already heard and, for many people, owned.
I so confused. :/
Comments
Not legally.
Were people really holding out, refusing to listen to the beatles until they became available digitally? I understand there's a generational line there and some people wouldn't buy CDs at all, but I just can't see someone waiting it out until they could get this on iTunes.
Yeah, it's not as earthshaking as both Apples would like it to be, and certainly 'late to the dance' as it has been described, but it's the first time you can legally download The Beatles.
Not a huge deal, but not insignificant either.
yeah, an ad for the Beatles on iTunes is also an ad for iTunes itself.
Wow. For real?
Damn - that boggles the mind. That many people don't want to illegally d/l it?
First, consider how many times Beatles' content has been able to be resold in various forms (anthologies, boxsets, etc.) A new format - in this case, legal download - was likely to be a big deal no matter what even if, as you say, many of these consumers might already own the exact same content in a different format. It's the Beatles, son. The BEATLES.
Second, I wouldn't be surprised if this ad push was the brainchild of Steve Jobs who, for decades, has had a long running dispute with Apple Records ever since they sued him over the Apple Computers name and logo. With iTunes, Jobs finally had a way to not simply resolve that conflict but actually tie his brand to the Beatles' brand and that has to be a particular feather in his cap. I'm sure Paul might spin it a different way but for Steve, this has to look like a mega-win. I think the ads are as much about celebrating (read: gloating) as they are about getting people to download "Here Comes the Sun" for the umpteenth time. Besides, take the most "game-changing band in music history" (notice scare-quotes) and combine that with the most "game-changing record store of the last 30 years" and you got two great tastes that (in theory) taste great together.
No matter how you slice it, this was going to be a big deal and whether from a sales p.o.v. or branding one, Apple (Computers) was going to do this up big-big-big. And so they have.
You severely overestimate the number of people who even possess the basic know-how to do this (and sure, it's not that hard but you'd be surprised how any kind of technological roadblock - following a zshare link for example - is enough to discourage people to follow).
What's lost in all the media coverage about (illegal) file sharing is, despite falling record sales...records still sell. In the millions. And people download songs, in the millions. File sharing didn't kill off the legitimate record retail industry; it now runs parallel to it (and I doubt at remotely equitable levels). Obviously that legit retail end is suffering through a massive decline but that's the not the same thing as saying "it's dead and been replaced."
That's why I get so pissed off about the record labels crying poor - the download format, while it has brought on people illegally downloading tons of music that many of them would have paid for in an earlier time and format, also allows record companies to sell music with the lowest amount of "overhead" in the history of the industry - and sell it they are, by the millions. The main reason for lost revenue by record labels, IMO, is not illegal downloading but an unwillingness to adapt to the new format and the internet for so many years. The direct-sale market of iTunes is an incredible opportunity for the owners of copyrights to music - think of how many times you hear about a song being featured on a TV show and 24 hours later it's been downloaded 784,000 times from iTunes, at $1 a pop. That's not chicken feed.
This raises an interesting point, namely that, when you consider its enduring popularity and artistic significance, the Beatles' catalogue is comparatively under-exploited. Apart from Carnival Of Light, pretty much everything they did is out there and has been for a while. Only the Anthology series - the first Beatles release of any real note since they split - can be said to have seriously attempted to capitalise upon the gotta-catch-'em-all impulses of completists, many of whom will have had a lot of the unreleased material on bootlegs anyway. A steady succession of "20th/25th/30th Anniversary Edition" reissues has been conspicuous by its absence.
There hasn't been an excessive number of compilations either, and many of those have either featured 45- or EP-only material, or genuinely sought-after rarities. Prior to the first CD releases, which were fairly perfunctory analog-to-digital transfers, I'd be willing to bet there were more compilations of otherwise widely available Stones material on the market than Beatles. Even though the demand for Beatles remasters has existed for the best part of twenty years, they only arrived last year - do it once, do it right, maybe? Yet somehow there exists this perception that EMI keeps going back to the well over and over again with the Beatles - I don't think that's true. There hasn't been a continuous cycle of the same material being repackaged over and over again, as there is with other acts of a similar vintage. Whither The Beatles Greatest Hits? The Best of The Beatles? The Very Best of the Beatles? The Definitive Beatles Hits Collection? No real need for 'em - that job was done admirably in 1973 with the Blue and Red comps.
Of course, the key point is that there's still a huge demand for their material. Last year, I remember the 16-y-o daughter of a couple I know telling me she couldn't decide whether to cop Muse's The Resistance or something from the Beatles remasters. And just as there's prestige attached to being the gatekeepers of the catalogue (EMI), so it is for Apple in being the first to officially bring it into the digital realm.
I totally agree. No overhead & no physical product so therefore no turn-around time. You would think the labels would have been all over this from jump, it's the cheapest way of releasing music, EVER!
an interesting post on how Amazon is reacting.
Plus, the physical boxset can be had for $30 less at Amazon than the "digital" boxset at Itunes, but that wont / didn't stop people from buying it at Itunes, as silly as that sounds.
Either way, I think it's neither surprising that iTunes would want to capitalize on the Beatles' brand (and align it with their own) nor that the songs/albums are selling quite well on iTunes, even amongst people who already own this stuff on other formats.
I could be wrong but I think one reason why Strutters are surprised at this is because most of us do NOT buy music off of iTunes and thus, we're not part of the consumer demographic that iTunes appeals to.
To wit:
Keep in mind too - Apple loyalty is astounding for any corporate entity. Even if you could save more money by buying the exact same music through a difference source, I'm willing to wager that iTunes consumers are less interested in finding the best deal possible and more invested in just the convenience of sticking to a single source.
No. About 20 different parties have to agree to this - they don't get to decide by themselves.
Not to mention that they only have the rights to half of the catalog.
well, remember, the Beatles masterstroke was always holding back their product, like Disney, and releasing it in grand fashion. They weren't on CD for YEARS, the Beatles CD bootleg industry was huge and then they had the big CD release event but only the UK albums, then they teased for years and years the release of the US albums until just finally putting those out recently. In the middle there was the "greatest hits" set with the unreleased track and of course the Anthologies with all the outtakes and alt takes and such, each time a massive media campaign including lots of "free" advertising as a Beatles release actually makes nightly newscasts and local newspapers front pages as an event.
also interesting, as I learned from working at record stores at the time, Beatles CD's were never discounted - why should they be, when I was selling used CD's any Beatles CD that came in was gone in 24 hours - they were just always $18.99 or whatever that crazy price was for years and years and they sold as well as anyone the whole time.
I couldn't imagine Apple (computers) doing it any other way. As much as I hate all kind of branding talk, I see the point why they make a big issue of bringing the Beatles to iTunes. It would be interesting to know who's downloading their stuff ... it can't be only boomers suddenly entering the digital music market.
You can still pretty much do this with vinyl too. I tend to take the high road, but it's tempting when some soccer mom walks in asking to buy the whole Beatles catalog on vinyl for her husband or son.
They just did the ltd. edition box sets, both a mono and a stereo, but they pretty much sold out on pre-order.
They haven't said for sure if they will release them individually, last I checked. But yeah, a no-brainer, imo.
Let It Be Naked could technically count as well?
Housey- Let It be?
Ibiza themed - All You need Is Love?
DnB - Maxwells Silver Hammer?
So we have THAT to look forward to.