99 cents per song is reasonable right?
Assumptions:
MP3 players holds roughly 100-250 songs per GB.
The MPAA wants songs to cost minimum around $.99 per song.
‘Smart phones’ have from 8-64 GB of space.
People don’t use ALL the space on their phones for music.
If the above assumptions are true:
The average cost of the music on 1GB of space is roughly $99-$247.50.
That means the cost of music is MORE than the cost of the device it is on. This may not be surprising but it also means:
The cost of the music on a 64GB Phone, with lets say around roughly 32GB of music, would cost $3,168-$7,920 JUST FOR THE MUSIC.
If the Phone held the max lets say 60GB the music would have cost around $5,940-14,850.
I don’t know about you but my first CAR cost less than that, and I SURELY never spent that much on music.
If the MPAA had it’s way, and we were forced to re-buy our music every time we shift it from one format to another, replacing your Smart Phone would cost you roughtly the replacement cost of a used car EVERY TIME! They better have given this older idea up completely, otherwise EVERYONE will end up being a pirate.
Also with digital space(hard drive, optical, whatever) getting smaller while holding MORE all the time, the music industry better hope their consumers find something else to put on their devices, or there WILL be a lot more priacy in the future than now. Even though $.99 sounds completely reasonable, when people have simple devices that will hold 6,400-16,000+ songs there is simply no way the average consumer is paying that price for all of the songs.
I just wanted to share. I was struck by some arguments in a forum and decided to do some math, which I had never really bothered doing before.

Skyrim