Monday, October 22, 2007 -- 11:40 a.m. -- on my couch

Napster and AT&T have announced a deal to bring Napster's catalong to AT&T wireless subscribers. Now, some users can download songs over the air -- meaning no computer, no wires, nothing.

No, it doesn't work on the iPhone.

Yes, that's great news.

For $1.99 ($1 more than iTunes) a song or $7.49 for 5 songs, this Napster deal allows wireless downloads over the AT&T network. That's different than the Wi-Fi store on iTunes, which requires Wi-Fi, of course.

The AT&T-Napster deals haven't gone so well in the past. One worked with one handset and cost $14.95 a month. The other worked only on certain plans and was really hard to figure out. There may be nothing wrong with this on the surface, if paying $1.99 a song or $7.45 is acceptable. Oh, and when you purchase a track, you get an email to your PC that allows you to download a copy of the song there. Oh, how nice!

I'm being very sarcastic.

An AT&T spokesman was quoted in a Reuters story saying that paying double for a song over the iTunes price won't be a problem because buys like these are impulse buys.

Uhhhhh, hello, AT&T? Noooooo.

You know what's going to happen? People with this service are going to see a song they like, go to iTunes and get it for 99 cents. They aren't going to pay a premium to download it over AT&T's network and listen to it right there. I'm not sure who these people are that AT&T knows, but they aren't real people. If you write me and tell me that you exist, I'll apologize, but I think it's a big marketing ploy. I'm not saying that over the air downloads don't work for games, but for music? From the same company that offers the iPhone? No way.

Once again, AT&T misses the boat and should look to the Apple model for guidance ... people with an iPhone will go out of their way to find a Wi-Fi hotspot to download from iTunes for 99 cents before they get a Napster-enabled phone and pay a huge premium to make an impulse buy in the middle of the street.

Sure, I understand that AT&T wants to tap into its network to offer music. Great. But it's not going to fly. Music lovers are already marching to a different beat and it's nothing like this one.

Please let me know what you think ... I really want to hear both sides.

Thanks for calling.

Scott,

Do you think its AT&T doing this, or is it he marketing people at Napster? My thinking is that the Napster people are the ones that are willing to provide this to AT&T and they are dictating what cost they are willing to provide it at. They see a void in the iTUNES model (you have to go to wifi to get it) and they think that they can charge a little more for the convenience.

All I think AT&T cares about is getting people on their service. How much one pays is the discretion of the consumer.

SCOTT'S REPLY: Oh, I'm sure it has a lot to do with Napster and negotiating prices. But in the end, if it's AT&T that's passing along the service to its customers, it can't just turn around and say "well, that's what Napster is charging." There needs to be a happy medium. Now I'm not saying that $1.99 is the most ridiculous price ever, and you are right, you don't have to find Wi-Fi to get it.

What I am still trying to determine is whether or not you get to keep the copy of the song for your PC or if it disappears when you cancel the phone.

It's only .89 cents if you want to download a song on Napster through your PC. If you want to download through ATT 3G network it's 1.99. So what. It's a convience.
The Itune model sucks. Subscription all the way. You mean to tell me if Itunes offered a subscription fee to their library a lot of users wouldn't prefer that than having to pay .99 cents a song?
I pay 14.99 for Netflix and still have to return the movies.

SCOTT'S REPLY: That is absolutely what I am telling you. I have zero interest in not owning my music. Zero. Music is not a movie. Music is music. Netflix works because I don't have to keep 500 movies, but songs ... oh yeah. And, I respect your point, but I completely disagree.

I just thought you would like to know that the iphone is mentioned on the Dilbert comic strip,

http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/dilbert-20071023.html

SCOTT'S REPLY: I love it! Of course Catbert has an iPhone. No doubt he made an intern wait in line for it. Thanks for the heads up.

I use iPhone I tunes but prefer my napster subscription music. I keep over 5000 songs on a 30g mp3 player. Iboght a napster supported AT&T phone so I could access my subscription music over. It works great. For that scenario AT&T did it right for me partnering with napster. But I don't buy napster songs. I also don't buy iTunes and hope that one day iTunes will offer subcription music.

SCOTT'S REPLY: My things about subscription music is that I don't get to keep it when I stop paying for it. Not sure what it is about music, but music feels like it belongs to me and is personal and should be mine. But I can understand why people want to see it in iTunes. That said, Marcel, if iTunes offered a choice? Buy or subscribe? I think that would be a good, good model for Apple.

I think of napster more like a library subscription. I could start buying books willy-nilly and storing them in my house, or I could pay a small fee and have the library store and maintain them for me. If I find a book I love and must own I will buy it and keep it forever much like napster's subscription. With napster I can preview the ENTIRE song and have it at my fingertips on my compatible device and if I must have it I will buy it and own it forever. If Itunes ever offered a subscription service like this I would gladly buy an Iphone and use their service.

SCOTT'S REPLY: I can't find fault with that logic at all, Aaron.

I really like my napster music subscription. It allows for unlimited downloads and I would love to have all of the songs on my iphone, but I just cant afford to pay a buck a song. They are all great quality mp3s and its nice to not steal music.

SCOTT'S REPLY: I think it's nice to have choices ... if I could choose between a subscription and buying, I would appreciate having the opportunity to decide for myself. But in general, I really do like to own my own music.

The comments to this entry are closed.