smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | Eric Van Rysdam <ericvanrysdam@gmail.com> |
| Subject | Re: audities-digest V7 #217 (1 msgs) |
| Date | Sat, 16 Oct 2010 21:38:39 -0400 |
[Part 1 text/plain ISO-8859-1 (1.7 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Couldn't have said this better myself. Complete agreement with you,
especially about the clogging up of "product" with the major labels and the
comparison to Waterloo, etc...
Eric Van Rysdam
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 15:27:44 -0700 (PDT)
> From: shteevea@yahoo.com
> To: audities@smoe.org
> Subject: Re: new Emusic pricing (again!)
> Message-ID: <540207.55682.qm@web65805.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
>
> I've been a steadfast member since 2001, and have never had problems using
> my 50
> or even 75 credits, but this will be it for me. The only time I haven't
> used
> all my credits is in the past few months, as the site got larded up with
> the
> Sony catalog, and it became impossible to actually discover any new music;
> if I
> didn't know exactly what I wanted, it was a useless exercise. The site
> will be
> that much worse when they add UMG.
>
> Honestly, I think they'll probably be dead in a year, as this latest
> expansion
> of the catalog will likely drive more folks away, and their not going to
> compete
> with iTunes or Amazon for major label downloads. I think they really had a
> chance about 18 months ago to stake a claim to being unique - to being the
> Waterloo or Easy Street or ear x-tacy of online music - but they've decided
> to
> be Best Buy. I mean, what's their slogan going to be, we're just like
> iTunes
> now but cheaper? Inertia is a powerful force, and folks aren't going to go
> en
> masse to save .25 a track. Just like I won't mind paying a little bit more
> to
> get the things I really want from CD Baby or Kool Kat or the artists
> themselves.
>
>
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.