James Fee
08-30-2005, 03:00 AM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.betanews.com/article/Most_Music_Subscriptions_Too_Pricey/1125071680' target='_blank'>http://www.betanews.com/article/Most_Music_Subscriptions_Too_Pricey/1125071680</a><br /><br /></div><i>"If companies expect consumers to get excited about subscription-based music, then the monthly fees are going to need to fall below $10 a month. Research firm Parks Associates said on Thursday it found that 41 percent of people with digital music players in the U.S. said $10 was the maximum they would pay for such a service. It gets worse in other countries. When presented with the equivalent price in their own currency, 49 percent in France, 52 percent in Germany, 56 percent in China, and 62 percent in the United Kingdom said $10 USD per month was their maximum. Not surprisingly, based on the success of peer-to-peer music programs, a third of respondents said music services should be free. So far, only one company offers a subscription service below that price: Yahoo. At either $4.99 USD per month for a yearly subscription or $6.99 USD monthly, Yahoo! Music Unlimited is the cheapest of any of the music services."</i><br /><br />The article is a little off as I believe Napster charges something like $9.95 if you don't want to download to a device, but the point is made. It will be interesting to see where Apple decides to price their subscription service (assuming it ever arrives), but I can assume it will be more than $10. The smart thing to do would be to price it at Yahoo!'s and enjoy millions more sales of iPods.