> Ah, but you have to remember, as the BPI have pointed out many times,
> that it's not the production cost of the disks which is significant,
> it's the shipping, marketing, artwork, A&R work, and so on which is so
> expensive - this is also why CDs were always more expensive than Vinyl.
> The fact that the production costs have fallen by an order of magnitude
> should not suggest in any way the the customer would benefit, at all, in
> any way whatsoever. After all, why would a recording company want
> /less/ income?
>
The production cost has fallen, and yet CDs are just as expensive as
ever (and as you say, more expensive than vinyl). So why have not
ordinary mechanisms of the market caused prices to fall? Could it be
collusion among the large music companies on prices? (Vinyl prices
were always high, too.) Personally I believe you have to respect the
law and follow proper procedures (changing the law rather than
violating it, etc), but OTOH I feel that the record companies deserve
all they get for fixing outrageous prices all these years. The
figures I have read indicate that their sales are down 50% compared to
a few years ago, and I have no sympathy for them.
Groklaw has been carrying some interesting articles on the RIAA and
DRM recently. There have been some interesting developments, mostly
setbacks for the monopolist and lock-in people.
|
|
