iTunes now number two US music retailer

Looks like there's something to this "downloading music" thing after all -- just eight months after topping Amazon, iTunes has now passed Best Buy to become the number two music retailer in the US. Apple says 50 million customers have bought over 4 billion songs, with 20 million sold on Christmas day alone. That leaves just Wal-Mart in first place, but with the percentage of digital music sales growing each quarter, ol' Wally may not be safe for long.

[Steven @ Feb 26th 2008 12:53PM]

way to go apple! itunes is the sh*t!

[Nubaeus @ Feb 26th 2008 12:57PM]

Minus the 'the'

[Flashpoint @ Feb 26th 2008 1:02PM]

As long as their are P2P sharing sites I refuse to ever buy a song.

These bastards are out to put middlemen in music so they can get their cut...this isn't about intellectual property at all. If you can put a song on the radio then you can affford for me to download it and listen to it at my discression.

[rv @ Feb 26th 2008 1:14PM]

Limewire is still the real #1...

[Shane Lloyd @ Feb 26th 2008 1:18PM]

So instead of giving artists a small portion of music sales, you are going to steal it and give them none? Radio stations play music because there are advertisements. When you download music illegally there are no ads, thus no revenue. Grow up. I hate the RIAA as much as the next guy, but, please don't try to justify steeling music. Just call an Ace an Ace.

[Zak @ Feb 26th 2008 1:18PM]

Flashpoint - Being ignorant about how the recording industry works is not helping you make your point. When you refuse to buy music, you are refusing to pay the musicians who made it. That makes you an asshat.

[tcc3 @ Feb 26th 2008 1:27PM]

Damn you Flashpoint. You give all of us a bad name. I didn't have much sympathy for the labels back in the days when it was $18 for a CD to get one good song and 10 tracks worth of filler crap. Downloading was payback and protest for decades of abusing their customers. We demanded choice, we got single downloads. We demanded better pricing, we got tracks for $1 and albums for $10. We demanded an end to the drm bullshit and thats working out ok for us too. Its never been a better time to be a music fan.

Stop rationalizing being a freeloader. If we want to be treated equitably, we need to put our money where our rhetoric has been: by buying music.

[Gorillamonk @ Feb 26th 2008 1:51PM]

I think our next step is to get better music out.

But, Flashpoint is really one of the people that they use as the stagnant idiots that seemingly pop up on the news and represent the whole downloading nation. I hate you, sir. Lest I be labotomized for free thought, let me download what I want and listen to it how I please.

Speaking of downloading, is anyone getting capped at 3gigs a day?

[Dale @ Feb 26th 2008 2:05PM]

@Flashpoint: when a radio station plays a song, they pay royalties which in turn compensate the artist. When you download a song illegally, nobody gets paid.

I certainly agree that middlemen like iTunes and the record labels take far more than they deserve from the sale of music, but illegal downloads hurt the artists far more than record label exploitation does.

[johnzilla @ Feb 26th 2008 3:55PM]

Actually, when radio stations pay royalties for playing a song, the royalties are paid to a publishing company. Whether those monies actually ever make it into artists' pockets depends on the contract that the artists sign. Crappy contract = no money.

I buy all my music, my point is that in many cases, the people being paid are not the artists, just the people who control the publishing and performance rights. Sometimes (hopefully) those people and the artist are one and the same. In many cases, they are not.

[John B @ Feb 26th 2008 4:20PM]

@Nubaeus:

I have to completely agree, if only because of their poor selection of iTunes Plus albums/songs. I was disappointed to see how relatively small their iTunes Plus offerings are. I'm finding more music on Amazon, and they're at least DRM free and 256 Kbps VBR. Unfortunately, a lot of the music that I would like to buy are still 128 Kbps and DRM-laden on iTunes, so I'll get them at Amazon instead.

@Flashpoint:

You're a dick.

[Eric M. @ Feb 26th 2008 12:55PM]

What, Best Buy sells CDs?

[Eric M. @ Feb 26th 2008 1:13PM]

And is it just me or does anyone else feel as though they can't justify purchasing digital songs when they can just as easily pirate it?

I'm not justifying piracy, but I prefer purchasing actual CDs because I can do with it whatever I please and even if my hard drive crashes or something I have my CD. But with services like iTunes I'm like why bother getting it just digital when I pirate it just as easily?

[Shane Lloyd @ Feb 26th 2008 1:25PM]

You're attempting to justify stealing music with some bizarre logic. It's like saying, I see a car parked in a public lot near my house, so I can't really justify going to the car dealership to buy one. Your theft is just on a smaller scale.

[Eric M. @ Feb 26th 2008 1:35PM]

@Shane Lloyd

I clearly stated, "I'm not justifying piracy". I'm just raising the issue that many people have. Because it seems like piracy has risen to such a state that many younger kids I know don't even know that using Limewire and other P2P are illegal.

Also I'm just asking what are the advantages of digital music, besides the slightly lower prices, over actual CDs?

[Krish the Fish @ Feb 26th 2008 2:22PM]

well i understand what you're saying. buying a cd at least gives you a hard copy of the music as a back up, regardless of the known fact that you'll probably be ripping it onto your computer and onto your iPod/Zune/whatever.

but one good thing i see in buying digital songs online is that, most of the time, you are free to sample the songs and buy only the ones you want, and you won't be stuck with buying the entire cd.

i guess. i'm with you though, buying cd's in the store has a more *satisfying* feeling to it.

[Jesse S @ Feb 26th 2008 3:10PM]

There isn't any real advantage to buying music online...In most cases, you're not getting the actual song, persay (per say?), but a lossily compressed version...Which means no archival.

I buy CD's because I can rip the music, scan the cover art in, and archive the music in whichever lossless format is on top (as of right now, that's FLAC).

[Scott @ Feb 27th 2008 1:57PM]

@shane:

If you can figure out a way to digitally clone my car, without any affect to my physical property, then I say have at it!

Your analogy is VERY different. Copying/IP infringement is not the same as physical theft.

[Allan @ Feb 26th 2008 12:55PM]

This is good and bad...

Good b/c the labels may actually start to see what potential can be found in finding a way to give your customers what they want, how they want it (with exceptions for DRM and all - but obviously many people don't mind that anyway).

Bad b/c they'll want to charge more money. Like usual.

[Gian @ Feb 26th 2008 4:02PM]

Umm...the studios are not exactly in a charitable industry. They do what they do to make money, not to watch you shake your ass. Trust me.

[George @ Feb 26th 2008 12:56PM]

Not to doubt the stats, but I don't know anybody who buys their music at wal-mart.

Then again, there's a sizable amount of people I know who refuse to use iTunes, so I may not know jack.

[Shane Lloyd @ Feb 26th 2008 12:58PM]

Walmart is the largest retailer in the United States. Thus, it is the largest music retailer in the United States (for now). Although urbanites may not shop at Walmart, the vast majority of Americans do.

[happy_penguin @ Feb 26th 2008 1:37PM]

Just because Walmart is the largest US retailer does not mean that they are the largest retailer of music. This is figured purely on music sales not total sales for the store.

[Gian @ Feb 26th 2008 4:08PM]

Personally, I wish Walmart would implode. Nothing has killed rural America like Walmart. It sure killed the small town I grew up. Screw Walmart. If they're headquarters burned down tomorrow, I'd smile ear to ear (as long as no one got hurt). Note to Walmart's lawyers: This is hyperbole. Spare my little self.

[Christopher @ Feb 26th 2008 5:00PM]

Poor people and college students shop at Wal-Mart.
You must be neither.

[willyboy @ Feb 26th 2008 10:55PM]

@ Christopher "Poor people and college students shop at Wal-Mart."

They also work there.

[Shane Lloyd @ Feb 26th 2008 12:57PM]

Amazing this has happened in under 5 years, especially considering that Best Buy, Wal-Mart, etc. have been selling CDs for decades. Digital distribution has taken over.

[Johan S @ Feb 26th 2008 12:59PM]

OK, now it's time to get rid of DRM.

[Zak @ Feb 26th 2008 1:20PM]

Which is exactly what Steve Jobs said in his open letter to the music industry. DRM needs to go away.

[carl @ Feb 26th 2008 2:31PM]

words /= action.

[phanbouy @ Feb 26th 2008 2:40PM]

@carl: i guess ole' Jobsy should just hold record execs at gunpoint then? or maybe pull the plug on iTunes as protest? riiiiiight. complaining w/o suggestions =/= useful

[Jesse S @ Feb 26th 2008 3:12PM]

Damn it Zak, can you stop sucking Steve Job's dick for one second?

I respect him because he is an amazing business man and a master marketer (look at Zak...when you create customer like him, your business will never be in the red), but you need to stop worshipping him.

[Zak @ Feb 26th 2008 7:35PM]

Jesse, what is your problem with me, exactly? All I did was point out that Jobs supports DRM free music, which means iTunes supports it, which means you can bet your ass that if the studios ever decide to wise up and allow all their music to be sold DRM free, iTunes will be on board with that. And that's important because iTunes is now the #2 music retailer.

I'd think you would appreciate somebody who has some clout with the record labels pushing for DRM free music - or are you such an anti-Apple fanboy that you're blinded to the benefits of it? And really now, because I want DRM to go away (my exact words) I suck Steve Jobs' dick? Really? Does everybody else who wants DRM to go away also suck Steve Jobs' dick?

[erasure25 @ Feb 28th 2008 2:14AM]

Amazon sells their downloadable music in MP3 format. It's already DRM free there so I've recently switched to buying from Amazon. I still use iTunes to browse through music though.

[eggothewaffle @ Feb 26th 2008 1:01PM]

Because every piece of music is actually worth $0.99.

But that's not really a fault of iTunes or an indictment against Apple; there seemingly is no more viable (and legal) music distribution/payment system.

The terrible weather's making me grouchy, I suppose >:[

In any case, better this (for both the artist and the consumer) than retail giants like Wal-Mart and Best Buy.

[Jubei @ Feb 26th 2008 1:03PM]

Anyone know if the Zune marketplace is #3? Seems like so many users say its so much better. Would be easy to see it making #3 on the list right?

[Daniel @ Feb 26th 2008 1:09PM]

#3 is amazon

[Mike @ Feb 26th 2008 3:56PM]

Simply, no.

[Daniel @ Feb 26th 2008 1:13PM]

woops, meant to say that Best Buy is now #3 and Amazon is #4

[rethciR @ Feb 26th 2008 2:30PM]

With only 1 million Zunes in the wild, I doubt Zune Marketplace is anywhere near #3.

[r3loaded @ Feb 26th 2008 1:09PM]

One question: why? Why do people want to pay more for lower-quality, DRM'd music when you can go to a store (or even Amazon if ur lazy) and buy a cheaper, high quality CD with the freedom to listen to the music on any device you want?

Might be a US thing - from my own anecdotal knowledge, in the UK people prefer to buy CDs rather than iTunes music.

[a ham sandwich @ Feb 26th 2008 1:13PM]

why do you think us Americans are so fat?

[Warren @ Feb 26th 2008 1:19PM]

Its about the convenience. iTunes is a quick stop when you hear a song you like on TV or in a movie. A lot of people are just too lazy to go out and purchase a CD when they know for the same if not less they can hop on iTunes - buy a CD and have it on their iPod in less than 5 min. Most people arent terribly concerned with audio quality they just want something quick and easy. And now that most cars have the iPod hookups to play it through your stereo - whats the need for a physical CD? You are grossly underestimating the sheer 'lazyness' of people. Sure they can go to amazon and buy the music - but most people dont want to take the time to go over to amazon - buy music - convert the files to iTunes format and then plop it on the iPod. Yes - I know its not hard - but again - why go to all that trouble when to them iTunes sells the same CD and it saves them 2 - 3 steps?

[Mike @ Feb 26th 2008 1:24PM]

I buy my music from AmazonMP3. They have higher bit-rates than iTunes, plus, no DRM, so I can use the MP3 however I choose. Did I mention that most songs on AmazonMP3 are .89 and not .99? Did I forget to say that with AmazonMP3 you aren't forced to pay tax, like you do with iTunes?

Why should I burn gas to drive to a store that's almost 15 miles away, so I can buy a CD encased in a whole lotta plastic for almost $20, when all I want is one song?

[Zak @ Feb 26th 2008 1:25PM]

The iTunes non-DRM songs are higher quality than Amazon's (because they're MP4s, and Amazon's are MP3s), and generally it is still cheaper on iTunes. I can buy a full album with 16 tracks for $10 on iTunes, a CD would cost at least $12. And then there's the instant gratification factor, and quite honestly even if I bought a CD just to rip into iTunes I probably wouldn't use a quality setting higher than 256 AAC anyway.

So it's not *just* laziness, there are some good reasons for getting music online.

[dcny @ Feb 26th 2008 1:42PM]

@Warren since when do you have to convert mp3's to work with itunes ? and that fact the most new cars have ipod hookups what percentage of people have 2007 & 2008 cars new many when taking into acount the amount of cars on the roads?

[Mike @ Feb 26th 2008 1:34PM]

I may have taken only two college math courses, but I'm not sure how iTunes tracks ($.99 + tax) are cheaper than AmazonMP3 tracks($.89 + no tax).

Non-DRM iTunes tracks are $1.29 + tax.

[Zak @ Feb 26th 2008 1:46PM]

Because not all Amazon tracks are $.89. Amazon uses VARIABLE PRICING, so you never know how much they're going to cost. The last album I looked at on Amazon was $.89 for most tracks, but $2 for three of them. That alone put the album over the cost of the same album on iTunes.

And no, non-DRM tracks on iTunes are $.99 Go look for yourself.

[Jesse S @ Feb 26th 2008 3:16PM]

Zak, just because something is MP4 doesn't mean it's higher quality than MP3. It's all about the bitrate.

I doubt that ANYONE can tell the difference between a V0 MP3 and the same song in FLAC (obviously, not transcoded from the MP3).

You can't get much better than the original.

However, MP4 can have better imppression than an MP3 (I think that if you double the bitrate of an MP4, that is the equivalent MP3 bitrate), but that doesn't mean that MP4's will always be better.

[r3loaded @ Feb 26th 2008 3:27PM]

For the UK:
13 track album off iTunes - £10.40
Same album off Amazon (physical CD, including next-day delivery) - £9.43

I still don't see the benefit of iTunes.