Apple Economics

This is a random beef post so feel free to skip it, there won't be a quiz at the end.

Why does Apple (and the music industry) charge the same price for every song? The number one hit in the country cost's $.99, the same exact price as the least purchased song on iTunes. According to Apple, not only are they the same quality, but they have the same demand base. I know that Steve Jobs kind of has to use this method because of his contracts with the recording industry, the same industry that has always charged the same for every cd, so he justifies it by saying, in short, "its easy to understand, and come on, its only 99 cents."

But it bugs the Kajagoogoo out of me. Its like saying a Lamborghini should cost as much as a Yugo because they're both cars. I really need someone from the record industry to call me and explain the reasoning behind this. Why not charge $2 for the Rihanna's "Take a Bow" (#1 right now) and $.25 for The Call's "I Don't Wanna" (never #1 on any chart, but the chart in my own heart)?* Does anyone really think those two songs have the same economic value? Well, I mean, besides the record industry?

Charge more for what's hot, charge less for what's not. This whole "charge the same and subsidize" mentality just hampers growth while keeping artist's profits down. You know management's on to something when an idea antagonizes both the talent and the customers. No wonder the record industry is failing.

Well I feel better now.


*Yes, I laid out my dollar for a song that 5 people bought this year. I admit, I'm part of the problem. But there are lots of random songs I can't pull the trigger on buying because it just bugs me. And no, I'm not an 87 year old man.