Over the last few weeks I have been reading my stack of Wired magazines in the hope of actually catching up to the present month. The oldest issues in the stack dated back the first half of 2006. The only reason it didn’t go further is because I moved from Virginia to Florida and probably got rid of the ones from before that. I don’t have an active “book” on my nightstand to make room for this catch up. I generally have textbook reading for class, but I’ve been reading the Wireds when I don’t have the quality time that kind of reading takes.
Reading product hype and other predictions six months to a year later does provide a new layer of insight. But I’m in to 2007 now, so it is dwindling fast. Soon I’ll be in the present again, gazing into the future.
Sure, not selling your music at the third largest music retailer makes loads of sense. I don’t really understand this move since everyone knows Apple makes virtually nothing on the sale of each song. For them, it is all about selling more iPods. I guess Universal is getting greedy and really want to charge more for their content. (How much do you think we are going to pay for a damn song people?)
This seems to be the other part of the pincer move that began with getting Microsoft to pay them $1 for each Zune sold. (I would be remiss if I did not make a joke about how they must really be rolling around in all the money that has generated.)
If Universal is worried about the dominance of a single music retailer, shouldn’t they be more concerned with the #1 and #2 retailers (Wal-Mart and Best Buy) before fretting over Apple?
They seem to be a company scraping and clawing to hang on to their broken business model. If they continue on this course, it is at their own peril. They, along with other old-media companies doing the same thing, are opening to door for enlightened content creators to cut out the middle man and reap the rewards for themselves.