1. Personaly, I don't think an unlimited subscription can be a good thing... certainly not for artists, and not for consumers as they can't access all the music they want... (indie music for example), so they have to subscribe to many music stores... I prefer the "NeoMusicStore" http://www.neomusicstore.com approach that lets you subscribe to the labels you want (as a podcast). No unlimited access, more expensive, but you can get lossless and a lot of extras... and releases ahead of their schedule... but it's for indie music... not exactly the same as RealNetworks, Virgin Digital, Yahoo! Music, WalMart offers...

Posted at 6:03PM on Jan 16th 2006 by Francois

2. It was only a matter of time! The writing had been on the walls ever since they sold off their money making software division (Roxio) to focus on the untested market of music downloads. Hell, I saw it coming from the begining I don't know why they didn't. Even with Apple stating that most of their money came from selling iPods not music due to the fact that the majority of the money goes back to the labels they still jump in the waters head first without knowing it's depth.



Oh well... it looks like Napster will be going down for a second count...

Posted at 7:53AM on Jan 17th 2006 by Musica360.com

3. It is no surprise that Nappy is on the down-slide. Poor management is the main obstacle for many music companies, labels, publishers etc...As a now legal site, they never found the real niche of their business. Instead of relying on the giants such as Apple, maybe they should have invested in developing music software that would be attractive to the music buyers. As download sales and physical cd sales are way down, why did they think leasing songs would be up? As the music biz changes often, it's important to be able to see past the end of your nose. Resetting goals and not holding on to past achievements that are archaic are more important now than ever before. It's no longer possible to be successful in spite of yourself. Many more may follow once again in Napsters footsteps. P2P, leasing songs, even traditional music marketing are eventually nearing their demise. Put a new spin on marketing music and that company will be "boss" as long as they don't become stagnant. Changes must be made by music retailers in order for them to realize profits and to stay on top of their own business goals, which by the way, should not be written in stone. The unflexible nature of the music industry in whole is unsettling to consumers plus the fact that the cost of living is now becoming a factor on how consumers spend their money. Realize these factors in a music business plan and you may find yourself making a profit where others are failing to break even.

Posted at 11:48AM on Jan 17th 2006 by Bert Gagnon

4. Here we go - everyone will take Napsters demise as proving the subscription model won't work for music. Thats like saying Studebaker's failure proves people no longer need cars. Napster has been so mismanaged from the start that this outcome was inevitable. If you spend more money than you take in for an extended period of time you will go out of business. Their board of directors and management team should be thrown in jail or lynched by the shareholders.

Posted at 1:51PM on Jan 17th 2006 by Steve

5. I don't believe it has anything to do with the subscription model. I think subscriptions are probably the way of the future for most of the youth today with much of what is released being disposable. Where a song from last year is considered "old". For this demographic, subscriptions might be their calling card. But that is not the current state "right now". And with iPod/iTunes controlling 83% of the market, the subscription modeling becoming a sustainable business might be a long way off, but I do think that it is coming.



Napsters problem was that they entered a business where the margin of profit is razor thin without anything else to bring in income (such as their Roxio software business). Apple makes more money on iPods than they do iTunes. Yahoo, Virgin, Mircosoft and even Real make money elsewhere. Their sole income doesn't hinge on the amount of music they sell...



and that's where Napster's mistake lies...

Posted at 2:34PM on Jan 17th 2006 by Musica360.com