I saw the Napster ads during the Super Bowl. Their "Do the Math" theme was interesting. The pitch compared downloading 10,000 songs at iTunes at $1 each to one million songs at Napster for $15 per month. Clever and expensive ad. Which leads me to a couple of questions -
1. Was it a waste of money? If Napster has a better deal than iTunes won't that spread on the net like wildfire at no cost to Napster at all?
2. Did anyone else think that Napster was less than forthright in their comparison to iTunes? To me, it wasn't clear from the ad that I only kept those downloads as long as I kept the monthly "rental" payments flowing.
3. Would you rather own your tunes for $1 each or rent the lot for $15 per month?
4. What assurance is there that the rental fees won't escalate after I "load" my mp3 player? (Napster downloads won't work on an iPod).
Here's some other discussion on the topic over at Max Blumberg's blog.
Anyway, it's an interesting marketing case study in progress.