Apple cashes in on Whitney Houstons death (attorneys, premium, rating)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wrong. A profit is added to the wholesale price. Whether the adjusted price was "automatic" or not is irrelevant. Apple did not eat the cost of the wholesale price increase from Sony. Apple profited off of Whitney Houston's death.
Liberals hate capitalism. But they love Apple. This is the dilemma of a lifetime for the Granola Crunchies. What will they ever do to tame the raunchy love affair between the two?
That is as dumb as saying, everybody who owns stock in Apple (or Granola Crunchies) is a liberal.
Sorry to be the first to inform you but, most liberals are not anti-capitalism. We own stock, run companies, and are just as capitalist as any conservative. We just don't put blind-faith in the corporate mantra of the religion of greed.
To say that Apple epitomizes the American greed corporation is an understatement.
I have no problem with this. If people lack the self control to wait a few weeks until the price drops, so be it. "A fool and his money are soon parted".
I have no problem with this. If people lack the self control to wait a few weeks until the price drops, so be it. "A fool and his money are soon parted".
And I thought that was " it is immoral to let a fool keep his money"
Wrong. A profit is added to the wholesale price. Whether the adjusted price was "automatic" or not is irrelevant. Apple did not eat the cost of the wholesale price increase from Sony. Apple profited off of Whitney Houston's death.
Apple makes the same amount today (maybe .09 after expenses) on each sale as yesterday. They only profit in increase in sales, not increase of price.
I could never for the life of me figure this one out. The offshore to a very high degree. When asked by the Obama if they would bring the mfg jobs back to the US it is said Jobs said to his table "never". It is not just the pay. It is the ability to have thousands of serfs LIVING IN DORMS subject to the occasional rousting out of their beds at midnight when the unexpected comes up. That factory is near hundreds of others with thousands of other serfs subject to the same conditions.
Anyway. Apples actions are morbid. And legal. Wait 3 months, price goes back to normal, problem solved.
Liberals hate capitalism. But they love Apple. This is the dilemma of a lifetime for the Granola Crunchies. What will they ever do to tame the raunchy love affair between the two?
Liberals love Apple? Sheesh - judging by the sales of their devices, I think lots of people love Apple.
For those who don't know how iTunes work - the $1.29 price gets pegged to the top selling songs. Everything else is $0.99. It's not a conscious decision to raise the price on a dead artist's music...it happens systematically based on volume.
Sony sells its product at wholesale price to distributors. The distributors mark up that price to make a profit. Apple made a corresponding increase to its price due to the increase in the wholesale increase. Apply could have eaten the cost. But it didn't. This makes Apple a profiteer in the name of Whitney Houston's death.
You fit the exact description that I put forth earlier of Liberals defending Apple at all costs.
Hilarious!
I've been in the music business for over 30 years, so allow me to 'splain it to you.
If Sony had not increased it's wholesale price, then the price retail price of the download would not have gone up. The corresponding rise in the download price is set and automatic, and was not in anyway caused by a conscious action on behalf of Apple. Apple's markup on wholesale prices for distribution is preset. That's how the price tier is already structured. Sony knows this, obviously. Sony owns the Whitney Houston catalog, not Apple.
Sony increased the price, Sony took the price increase away when people reacted negatively and their PR was in danger of taking a huge hit.
Sony would not be apologizing for it if Apple had set the increase of it's own volition. Apple was not "profiteering", it was adhering to the price structure already set and negotiated with the big four record labels. The word "profiteering" implies that Apple increased it's price to take advantage of an unfortunate event. In fact, Apple did nothing at all, which is what it's legally supposed to do under it's contract with the labels, Sony included. Apple's prices are set, they can't just "eat them". That's not how it works.
Again, it had nothing to do with Apple, as is evidenced by the fact that Sony caused it and Sony rectified it. They've admitted as much and apologized. Which they certainly would not do if they weren't the ones responsible.
Apple makes the same amount today (.09 after expenses) on each sale as yesterday. They only profit in increase in sales, not increase of price.
Right. And demand has gone up for Houston's music, thus Sony's "mistake" of raising prices. Apple had no problem obliging. It was a business decision that equated to additional revenue (and profits). They knew what was going on. Apple doesn't skimp on those kinds of details. No successful business would.
That reminds me I have to rummage through my step fathers lp collection to find her LPs and sell them on EBay.
Dolly Parton is going to make bank as well off of this not to mention Clive Davis.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
