Great news for eMusic Subscribers

This will be good for those harder to find out of print titles.  Combine this catalog with their newly announced quarterly plans and I suspect eMusic will gain a decent amount of new subscribers. 


Sony Agrees to Provide Its Older Songs to eMusic

   
By BRAD STONE
Published: May 31, 2009

In another example of struggling major music labels and Internet services finding common ground, Sony Music Entertainment has agreed to make its back catalog of songs available on eMusic, one of the largest music retailers on the Web.


Bruce Springsteen?s classics will be available on eMusic.

EMusic, a company based in New York City, has some 400,000 subscribers who pay a monthly fee to download a certain number of songs. Its service is primarily aimed at adults who are fans of music from independent labels.

The company plans to announce on Monday that it will add all Sony Music tracks that are more than two years old, including material from artists like Michael Jackson, Bruce Springsteen and Billy Joel.

The major labels had long been skeptical of the economics behind eMusic?s proposition to consumers. Subscribers to eMusic?s ?basic? plan, for example, pay $11.99 a month to download 30 songs ? or about 40 cents a song, far below the prices on Apple?s iTunes. Songs are in the MP3 format and do not have restrictions against copying.

As part of the deal, eMusic says it will slightly raise prices and reduce the number of downloads for some of its monthly plans.

Danny Stein, eMusic?s chief executive, said he had been talking to the major labels about adding their music for several years. Talks continue with Warner Music, the Universal Music Group and EMI, he said. He added that many of the independent labels had been asking the company to raise its prices.

?We have been looking for a catalyzing event to do it, and we think introducing this vast, quality catalog from Sony is that event,? Mr. Stein said.

The deal highlights several shifts in the online music landscape. The major labels gave up their objections to selling songs in the unprotected MP3 format in 2007. They also prevailed upon Apple this year to move to variable pricing in its iTunes store. Apple now sells older songs for 79 cents and new tracks for $1.29.

The major labels have also been more willing lately to strike more flexible and less expensive deals with start-ups like Imeem that are trying new approaches to online music.

Sony Music and eMusic would not disclose the particulars of their deal. An executive at Sony Music, a subsidiary of the Sony Corporation, said the company was interested in seeing multiple models for digital music coexist on the Web.

?We think the model of buying a set amount of music each month under an MP3 allowance is an attractive subscription option for consumers,? said Thomas Hesse, president of Sony?s Global Digital Business unit. ?We are supportive of offerings that encourage fans to dig deep into the repertoire of our artists and discover the richness of our catalog.?
actually this sucks for current subscribers and i suspect there will be a HUGE uproar over this, i'm glad that my two year subscription just got renewed.

so 90 downloads for 20 bucks a month went to
50 downloads for 20 bucks a month

that's not a "slight" change in pricing

so now those of us who like to support indie musicians now have a higher cost per download in order to support Sony Music :p

Can you even sign up for a two-year plan anymore?
This basically sucks…I go from $15/65 dls to $15/37 dls.

On the up side, they're also introducing "album pricing": albums with 12 or more tracks will cost 12 credits. That actually might help to make up for this somewhat since I mostly dl albums.

But this still blows.
Yeah - this does suck.  I might cancel my account because of it.
The best annual plan you can get is

eMusic Plus Annual  35 downloads  a month cost $0.41 per track, there is no equivalent to the current eMusic Premium Annual plan

compare that to what i've got which is 90 downloads a month at a cost of .16 per track

that slight increase works out to 25%

now the new album pricing model may soften the blow a bit, but just how many of those albums will actually be available.  of course i tend to download as many singles as i do albums…

"Album pricing will allow you to download selected albums of 12 or more tracks for the price of 12 downloads. The change will be a boon to fans of classical music and two-minute thrash-masters alike."

I'd be curious to see if they offer any sort of deal to those who try to cancel.
I now suspect that they are going to lose a lot of subscribers over this one, particularly overseas user whose rates are going up without the potential of getting access to the new content.

I'm not one that supports class action lawsuits, but suspect one won't be to far off in this case.  Hopefully, they'll come to their senses and keep the old pricing plans for the people who don't want to download from Sony's back catalog….
Class action lawsuit on what grounds?  My guess is they reserve the right to change their plans when they see fit, as long as they notify you in advance of any changes and allow you the opportunity to cancel before that change takes effect.
If they can finally get Sub Pop, Drag City, Numero, and other big indies on board, plus the album pricing, I might stick around…
calla703 - your probably right about the lawsuit thingy, i'm just sittin' here over thinking the matter

bellenseb - that thought did occur to me, as it possible that other labels will want to get in on the action to get a cut.  if of course eMusic can retain a goodly number of users over this price hike.  it's still a good bargain especially for those with current yearly subscriptions
Yeah - the whole thing sucks.  I know why they're doing it, but at the same time I think it opens the door for a competitor to come in and stick to indies entirely and offer a cheaper plan.

This makes me very tempted to look into getting a Napster account through Best Buy.  Has anybody tried that yet?
that sucks bigtime - I have (had) the 90 DL plan
kosmo wrote:
actually this sucks for current subscribers and i suspect there will be a HUGE uproar over this, i'm glad that my two year subscription just got renewed.


was that just random luck on your part? do you think you'll still get the same # downloads or will they reduce them?
Last time they changed their plans and rates, they grandfathered my plan in.  As long as I don't change it, I still pay $16/month for 90 downloads.  I'm not sure that won't be the case again – note the article quoted that "eMusic says it will slightly raise prices and reduce the number of downloads for some of its monthly plans."  It said SOME plans….

I'm optimistic.
kosmo wrote:
"Album pricing will allow you to download selected albums of 12 or more tracks for the price of 12 downloads. The change will be a boon to fans of classical music and two-minute thrash-masters alike."


Most classical music CDs have fewer than 12 tracks. This only helps those who listen to nothing but comps and baroque.
PS, I pay by the year ($192).  Not sure that makes any difference in the way they treat my account.
brennser wrote:
kosmo wrote:
actually this sucks for current subscribers and i suspect there will be a HUGE uproar over this, i'm glad that my two year subscription just got renewed.


was that just random luck on your part? do you think you'll still get the same # downloads or will they reduce them?


Yup very random luck on my part…  My subscription runs through 2011 with the same amount of downloads until then, at that point it get changed to a lower plan.  They probably are losing money at this point on those 2 year subs, which is why they no longer exist.  I suspect trying to change the terms of existing prepaid subs would have brought some legal headaches…

In 2003 on this very board the discussion was about the death of eMusic when they dropped the unlimited downloading accounts, only to become a better service.  here they are 6 years on again annoying subscribers with a major change.  It will be interesting to see what it will look like in 2 years. 

Bags wrote:
PS, I pay by the year ($192).  Not sure that makes any difference in the way they treat my account.


most of the existing one to two year plans are gone, so you'll be moved into one of the downgraded new plans
Anybody on here use or know anything about the new Napster service?