David's World

February 3, 2005

Selling music by subscription vs. human nature.

The music industry has been trying hard to spread the word about their music subscription models: they say, they'll get rid of iTunes' model of selling song by song, and replace it with one where you pay a monthly fee to listen (not necessarily download and own) whatever you want.

Once more, these guys couldn't be more wrong in their perception of what people want. Hadley Stern over at Applematters has a commentary from an economical and practical point of view. He argues, e.g. that the iPod doesn't support subscriptions. But I'd like to do a little more mind-reading of music customers like you and me.

The big issue is a psychological one: people like to own things, rather than paying for consumption. That's why so much money is spent on DVDs, even though you don't watch them very often, and just getting them as rentals would be much cheaper. In a situation where you don't have an alternative: yes, people pay for entertainment: cinema, theatre, bars, sometimes even pay TV. But if there's an alternative, that is, to buy songs for little money, they happily go for that.

Subscription models weaken the well-known collector's experience: we love to have a book collection, a CD collection, or an MP3 collection. We love to show it off to our friends, because we identify with the stuff we collect. Sometimes, songs even serve as keepsakes, stirring up old memories.

Subscriptions will have a place and will get the music fat cats a constant cash flow - but their market is limited. Subscriptions are for dedicated, consumerist few. iTunes is for everyone.

I agree David.
This seems to go to the heart of the concept of "ownership" in the digital age. Things like Verizon disabling bluetooth so you can't share "your" photos without paying, things like the new broadcast flag in the US, things like music subscriptions - all seem like attempts to curb what we own and make us pay for the privalege. Media/Entertainment should be about paying for quality and owning your media for your own "fair use" purposes - not being forced into more and more restrictive models.

S