Well, if emusic is trying to make itself more attractive as a potential target for acquisition by iTunes, then I'd expect the next big change (aside from label additions) would be to make everyone's membership an annual. No more month-to-month cancel when you want stuff. Being able to sell the guaranteed steady monthly income from an locked-in-annually subscriber base would be an attractive quality for emusic to have.
This ignores the practical logistics and response of the emusic customers, which I couldn't begin to guess.
i don't see why any of the changes make emusic more attractive as a potential target.
if emusic wants to be attractive to, say, itunes, it should just be a success at what it does. making itself more like itunes isn't going to endear it to itunes, which hardly is desperate for a likely largely reduced, largely overlapping base of customers (at least not at the price it would take to buy a fairly large, longstanding competitor).
Another possibility is that the emusic management is just not very good. Doesn't this happen all the time? Someone buys a business and tries to make it grow, then fails and it falls appart. Not all of these changes are necessarily rational; take the low-bit encoding. Absolutely no reason for; it was a fumble. And the new pricing is a big mistake too. The new Iron & Wine is a good example of that; yesterday it was $6.99 at amazon, and $8.30 on emusic, except that for most people with grandfathered bonuses at emusic it was actually only $7.25, which is a lot closer to $6.99 than $8.30 is; close enough that the average person would stick with emusic. Credit based pricing makes the direct comparison shopping more difficult. And again there was absolutely no reason to switch to cash based pricing, or at least not that I can think of.
So maybe they're trying to position to sell, maybe they're just trying to improve their position; it just doesn't seem to me like they're doing a very good job. They are not managing customer relations, and adding two big major labels didn't really improve their subscriber base. My money is on they're just not very good at this.
@ScissorMan - My main question about those boards is, why would anybody bother trying to resurrect them as a place to talk music? I'm not suggesting that everybody should just post here and quit complaining, but there are plenty of places to talk music on the Internet that aren't tied into a paid account. There's absolutely no benefit to using that board.
@Daniel - While I don't agree with all of the complaints, the state of that message board lies 100% on eMusic. They have cultivated that atmosphere through their horrendous communications with customers. As far as I can tell, the only reason they keep those boards open is so that they can occasionally post news or customer responses and pretend that they've told everybody.
Although the number of disgruntled customers may not be as high as many there assume, my guess is that it's probable significantly higher than you think - there has been plenty of outrage on 17dots, Facebook, and Twitter with each of these changes. Some of those complaints may be overlaps, but many aren't and more aren't represented at all. Every subscriber that I know personally has grown disgruntled, frustrated or outright angry with eMusic ever since the introductions of Sony, but none of them participate in any of the online discussions about the service. Of course by this point most of them are former subscribers.
amclark: yeah, those are valid points and legitimate possibilities. who knows? maybe adding the major labels was needed to prevent erosion of the subscriber base, or maybe it was just a poor decision. the credits v. cash thing is a valid point. i'll say again, though, that i think amazon.com's sale prices are traps for the unwary (or unconcerned). since amazon.com eats the loss on those sale items, it can undercut emusic's prices and severely damage emusic in the process. but, overall, amazon.com's prices are substantially higher than emusic's, and i wouldn't necessarily expect the sales to be as frequent or generous if amazon.com is successful in pushing competitors out of the market (even if they remain, the customer who is buying far more than just that day's special is going to pay far more, on average).
@Daniel - While I don't agree with all of the complaints, the state of that message board lies 100% on eMusic. They have cultivated that atmosphere through their horrendous communications with customers.
i don't see it, but maybe i'm not paying enough attention to the reasonably-worded complaints. the only one i know about is the sound-quality issue. and i hear you on that one, tho it isn't as important to me. it's hard to know what to make of the lower encoding rates. maybe it was just a unilateral decision by emusic, made out of convenience? or maybe it was a cost-cutting measure (tho i don't see how or why that would be true)? or maybe -- and this is what makes the most sense to me -- it had something to do with the contracts that brought umg to the site, and perhaps renegotiations with other labels as a result of the broader site changes. not sure what emusic's options would be if it's the latter case, and i don't know what to make of the fact that they're encoding new content at a higher rate (if i understand all the tech-terms correctly).
i don't see it, but maybe i'm not paying enough attention to the reasonably-worded complaints.
What I'm saying is that if a company radically alters their business model over the course of a year and while doing so communicates these changes with varying degrees of clarity while frequently not responding to valid questions and criticisms they are creating a basis for user discontent. If they then provide a message board with no moderation but hint that they may actually participate there, but only do so at random intervals, that message board will become a haven for nonstop vitriol.
There will always be users that rant and rave about a company's product or service, but eMusic has fostered that behavior and an area for it to be displayed. If they actually bothered to regularly communicate with subscribers, respond to complaints in a timely manner, create a customer service interface, or moderate the discussions the forums would not look like that.
The reason the boards were decent before Sony was that regular customers took care of them. Sure there was rudeness directed at newbies from time to time and some general silliness, but there were also a ton of helpful comments and posts by customers to diffuse those situations. By creating a resentment in many of those regulars and chasing others off with the changes in service, but not filling in that void of "self-moderation" the boards deteriorated into what they are today.
if the complaints were being voiced mostly by people like you, i'd agree. but that's not what's been happening over there these days. "time is up!," "they need to be taught a lesson!," "see? chatty (cathy nevins) won't show her face around here any more!," "i give emusic six months to survive!," "i asked a question this morning, it's now 3PM, where is my answer?," "i downloaded a track, and it was defective; correct this today!," "i'm adding reviews to every umg title i can find, warning people not to download this title!," "i've changed emusic's wiki page, because i think it's inaccurate to call this a 'subscription service' any longer." obv., i'm paraphrasing, but this is what the tone is like.
My main question about those boards is, why would anybody bother trying to resurrect them as a place to talk music? I'm not suggesting that everybody should just post here and quit complaining, but there are plenty of places to talk music on the Internet that aren't tied into a paid account. There's absolutely no benefit to using that board.
I disagree slightly here - I think the central (theoretical) attraction of the emusic messageboards is that the users are directly tied to a single, shared source of music. Generally speaking, the music discussed is available to all users for a "decent" price. However, I admit that since prices have increased, it's not so trivial to just go grab a given recommendation and not make much dent in your account.
But my experience with other music boards is that without the shared source, the discussion doesn't end up being so tied to everyone being able to equally access the music under discussion. For example, the old "listening club" threads wouldn't have been fun or productive at the other boards I've read.
Bottom line is that I like discussion and advocacy centered around a shared source of music, it just kinda greases the wheels for that stuff. It's not impossible to mimic that elsewhere (emusers does an ok job with it), but I find in general that reducing that connection makes discussion a bit more amorphous regarding participants actually hearing the music.
but that's not what's been happening over there these days. "time is up!," "they need to be taught a lesson!," "see? chatty (cathy nevins) won't show her face around here any more!," "i give emusic six months to survive!," "i asked a question this morning, it's now 3PM, where is my answer?," "i downloaded a track, and it was defective; correct this today!," "i'm adding reviews to every umg title i can find, warning people not to download this title!," "i've changed emusic's wiki page, because i think it's inaccurate to call this a 'subscription service' any longer." obv., i'm paraphrasing, but this is what the tone is like.
Right, but in addition to paraphrasing, you're lumping together legitimate grievances (poor communication from eMu, concerns about eMu going out of business, slow/non-existent customer service) with angry and largely-pointless retaliatory outbursts (I'm quitting, I'm telling everyone to go to AMZN, and really, anything related to Wikipedia, though I do totally agree that they should get rid of the Wikipedia boxes in eMu artist and album pages).
You've got the right idea, though: You're not saying things like "eMusic is a business and if you expect them to behave like they're anything other than a business you're a fool," which really only perpetuates the cycle, and (arguably) glosses over the fact that they're still claiming to be supportive of independent music in complete contravention of their recent corporate behavior. Unfortunately, I don't know what the alternative is if you want to help convince the bad-mouthers to go away in the short term.
Other than that, I'm with Amclark2 on this one - eMu's recent actions suggest they simply don't know what the hell they're doing. I'm getting the same vibe from them now that I got when the Bush Administration first took office, but they turned out to be intentionally malicious too... it's hard to believe eMu is being intentionally malicious, but incompetence will often reach a point where it's indistinguishable from malice, and they're definitely getting there!
i doubt they're being malicious or incompetent. i just think the digital music world -- the entire music industry, really -- is frustrated, confused, resisting change, the equivalent of horse-and-buggy companies of the late 19th century, trying to force the genie back into the bottle, desperately trying to figure out how to adapt in the new economy (e.g., 360 deals, which labels didn't do before). and it's very hard, if you're not itunes or amazon.com, to survive as an online store in this world.
Right, but in addition to paraphrasing, you're lumping together legitimate grievances (poor communication from eMu, concerns about eMu going out of business, slow/non-existent customer service) with angry and largely-pointless retaliatory outbursts (I'm quitting, I'm telling everyone to go to AMZN, and really, anything related to Wikipedia, though I do totally agree that they should get rid of the Wikipedia boxes in eMu artist and album pages).
yeah, you're right. there are people who, even when they make sharp criticisms, do so responsibly and with appropriate decorum. i'm thinking you're one of those people (i'm a little loopy from a work assignment right now, but that's my memory). obv., that's all fine. it's the "angry and largely-pointless retailiatory outbursts" that got me to the point where i just decided, "enough is enough," and stopped bothering over there. maybe i'll go back, idk.
I said when this thing started, if they can succeed in driving me away, they have a real problem. Well, they're pushing me all right. And yet, and yet...
...Not a one of them UMG. And that's only about half the list. Largely reccs from this board. Get thee behind me, Stan.
yeah, no doubt. i've got 115 items in my saved-for-later list. the thing is, if i leave emusic, it's going to be much harder to track down that stuff, since i think some of those labels aren't available elsewhere (plus, i wouldn't have a built-in incentive to locate them, since i wouldn't be on a subscription plan any longer).
thanks for the kind words, btw. i appreciate them.
but, overall, amazon.com's prices are substantially higher than emusic's, and i wouldn't necessarily expect the sales to be as frequent or generous if amazon.com is successful in pushing competitors out of the market (even if they remain, the customer who is buying far more than just that day's special is going to pay far more, on average).
Exactly right. And even more so given certain taste patterns. For me personally (no extrapolation to everyone else intended or implied) almost all of the artists and labels that keep me on emusic are significantly more expensive on Amazon, they are rarely in the sales, and there is rarely much in the sales that interests me, so Amazon is certainly not positioned on my horizon as an alternative - except as an occasional way to buy album-only tracks for a dollar and the rest from emusic where the album-only thing has not been consistently applied at both. (Niggardly behavior, perhaps, but it can really mount up over time in terms of savings.)
users are directly tied to a single, shared source of music
I think this is a good point too. Bandcamp, emusic and netlabels between them are playing that role here - a part of the attraction here is being able to get straight at something someone recommends. That and the fact that the other people on here seem like the people I'd like to talk to.
Yeah, if the music I wanted was the latest Sufjan and Decemberists, there would certainly be no reason to continue at eMu. Posting that S4L reminded me that the music I'm interested in is not what's on sale at Amazon, 7digital, and the rest. (Notwithstanding Roots of Chicha still $5 at the moment, but you get the point...) Guvera could be big for me if the credits ever start flowing.
Oh Amie, how we miss you. So much great crazy stuff. This album came up on my iPod today:
hey brighter!!! think you could find time to help a brother out??? i'm so low on discovery i'm making up chimes in my sleep! what's worse, i thought "wow! these 6th graders with bells, frogs, chimes, crystals, etc really blow me away" as i sat in garrett's music class presentation.
not sure what mechanism you want to use for access - just ping me and i'll comply!
thankee 2x
68
Well, after a few dogged efforts I think I am ready to abandon the project of trying to get the new emusic board moderators to acknowledge polite questions. On a related note, sad as the post is, I have to admit that this thread made me laugh out loud several times. I am not sure what this combination of reactions means.
What would be the upside to having them draw up such a document? I'm not saying it's a bad idea, I'm just wondering what you'd be hoping to accomplish in the unlikely event that they would make that kind of effort.
@daniel, a code of conduct is a bit extreme, but I was looking for what behavior would be tolerated. I publicly asked for moderation because I became incensed by the way members were using the board to insult one another. The mods that have been given to us seem more like PR guys. To some extent, that's find. Many discussion come down to uncertainty regarding the company's policies. That said, when I asked about the terms of use, I was fishing for some information that would tell me what eMusic would do with the boards, specifically whether or not they would start weeding out dissent. That doesn't seem to have happened yet.
I'm still unsure of the role that the moderators are having. We had a gap of a week or so with no interventions, and now appear to have nothing for the last couple of day. Are they doing a PR role? Have they just taken over from Cathy in making occasional points/responses? Are they actually moderating every comment made? I can't see that, else we wouldn't get the typical 'emusic sucks' comments that still come up. Fairly obviously they are not just employed for this role, else we'd see more of them.
Understandable in that sense, yes. What's not understandable to me is that they are behaving more like an official absence. I can't see how that takes any heat away. I suspect some daily politeness from them would go a fair way. But three mods have managed about one post between them in the last 10 days. Offering people a mechanism to direct their questions to then studiously ignoring those questions seems an utterly bizarre way to try to calm things down.
Yeah, eMusic exhibits a kind of shallow incompetence across the board that continues to slightly amaze and amuse (and of course exasperate) me. They never manage to even do simple things "just right". Fortunately I've not had many problems historically with the bread-n-butter functionality of downloading purchased music at relatively low prices, which is why I'm still around.
Comments
This ignores the practical logistics and response of the emusic customers, which I couldn't begin to guess.
if emusic wants to be attractive to, say, itunes, it should just be a success at what it does. making itself more like itunes isn't going to endear it to itunes, which hardly is desperate for a likely largely reduced, largely overlapping base of customers (at least not at the price it would take to buy a fairly large, longstanding competitor).
So maybe they're trying to position to sell, maybe they're just trying to improve their position; it just doesn't seem to me like they're doing a very good job. They are not managing customer relations, and adding two big major labels didn't really improve their subscriber base. My money is on they're just not very good at this.
@Daniel - While I don't agree with all of the complaints, the state of that message board lies 100% on eMusic. They have cultivated that atmosphere through their horrendous communications with customers. As far as I can tell, the only reason they keep those boards open is so that they can occasionally post news or customer responses and pretend that they've told everybody.
Although the number of disgruntled customers may not be as high as many there assume, my guess is that it's probable significantly higher than you think - there has been plenty of outrage on 17dots, Facebook, and Twitter with each of these changes. Some of those complaints may be overlaps, but many aren't and more aren't represented at all. Every subscriber that I know personally has grown disgruntled, frustrated or outright angry with eMusic ever since the introductions of Sony, but none of them participate in any of the online discussions about the service. Of course by this point most of them are former subscribers.
i don't see it, but maybe i'm not paying enough attention to the reasonably-worded complaints. the only one i know about is the sound-quality issue. and i hear you on that one, tho it isn't as important to me. it's hard to know what to make of the lower encoding rates. maybe it was just a unilateral decision by emusic, made out of convenience? or maybe it was a cost-cutting measure (tho i don't see how or why that would be true)? or maybe -- and this is what makes the most sense to me -- it had something to do with the contracts that brought umg to the site, and perhaps renegotiations with other labels as a result of the broader site changes. not sure what emusic's options would be if it's the latter case, and i don't know what to make of the fact that they're encoding new content at a higher rate (if i understand all the tech-terms correctly).
There will always be users that rant and rave about a company's product or service, but eMusic has fostered that behavior and an area for it to be displayed. If they actually bothered to regularly communicate with subscribers, respond to complaints in a timely manner, create a customer service interface, or moderate the discussions the forums would not look like that.
The reason the boards were decent before Sony was that regular customers took care of them. Sure there was rudeness directed at newbies from time to time and some general silliness, but there were also a ton of helpful comments and posts by customers to diffuse those situations. By creating a resentment in many of those regulars and chasing others off with the changes in service, but not filling in that void of "self-moderation" the boards deteriorated into what they are today.
But my experience with other music boards is that without the shared source, the discussion doesn't end up being so tied to everyone being able to equally access the music under discussion. For example, the old "listening club" threads wouldn't have been fun or productive at the other boards I've read.
Bottom line is that I like discussion and advocacy centered around a shared source of music, it just kinda greases the wheels for that stuff. It's not impossible to mimic that elsewhere (emusers does an ok job with it), but I find in general that reducing that connection makes discussion a bit more amorphous regarding participants actually hearing the music.
You've got the right idea, though: You're not saying things like "eMusic is a business and if you expect them to behave like they're anything other than a business you're a fool," which really only perpetuates the cycle, and (arguably) glosses over the fact that they're still claiming to be supportive of independent music in complete contravention of their recent corporate behavior. Unfortunately, I don't know what the alternative is if you want to help convince the bad-mouthers to go away in the short term.
Other than that, I'm with Amclark2 on this one - eMu's recent actions suggest they simply don't know what the hell they're doing. I'm getting the same vibe from them now that I got when the Bush Administration first took office, but they turned out to be intentionally malicious too... it's hard to believe eMu is being intentionally malicious, but incompetence will often reach a point where it's indistinguishable from malice, and they're definitely getting there!
yeah, you're right. there are people who, even when they make sharp criticisms, do so responsibly and with appropriate decorum. i'm thinking you're one of those people (i'm a little loopy from a work assignment right now, but that's my memory). obv., that's all fine. it's the "angry and largely-pointless retailiatory outbursts" that got me to the point where i just decided, "enough is enough," and stopped bothering over there. maybe i'll go back, idk.
i am happy that traffic has picked up so considerably here. it's a good alternative.
I said when this thing started, if they can succeed in driving me away, they have a real problem. Well, they're pushing me all right. And yet, and yet...
...Not a one of them UMG. And that's only about half the list. Largely reccs from this board. Get thee behind me, Stan.
thanks for the kind words, btw. i appreciate them.
Exactly right. And even more so given certain taste patterns. For me personally (no extrapolation to everyone else intended or implied) almost all of the artists and labels that keep me on emusic are significantly more expensive on Amazon, they are rarely in the sales, and there is rarely much in the sales that interests me, so Amazon is certainly not positioned on my horizon as an alternative - except as an occasional way to buy album-only tracks for a dollar and the rest from emusic where the album-only thing has not been consistently applied at both. (Niggardly behavior, perhaps, but it can really mount up over time in terms of savings.)
I think this is a good point too. Bandcamp, emusic and netlabels between them are playing that role here - a part of the attraction here is being able to get straight at something someone recommends. That and the fact that the other people on here seem like the people I'd like to talk to.
Oh Amie, how we miss you. So much great crazy stuff. This album came up on my iPod today:
not sure what mechanism you want to use for access - just ping me and i'll comply!
thankee 2x
68
wasn't it a deplorable comment or two that led you to ask for moderators in the first place?