<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google to Compete with iTunes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sacriliciousmarketing.com/2009/marketing-strategies/resources/uncategorized/google-to-compete-with-itunes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sacriliciousmarketing.com/2009/marketing-strategies/resources/uncategorized/google-to-compete-with-itunes/</link>
	<description>Music, Restaurant and Celebrity Online Marketing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 03:49:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Record Labels Still Freaking the F Out About Piracy &#124; Report $4.2 Billion Loss in Sales &#124; Sacrilicious Marketing</title>
		<link>http://sacriliciousmarketing.com/2009/marketing-strategies/resources/uncategorized/google-to-compete-with-itunes/comment-page-1/#comment-80</link>
		<dc:creator>Record Labels Still Freaking the F Out About Piracy &#124; Report $4.2 Billion Loss in Sales &#124; Sacrilicious Marketing</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:23:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sacriliciousmarketing.com/?p=185#comment-80</guid>
		<description>[...] Labels should become software companies. If sales of music recording software is increasing and recorded music sales are declining, it makes sense for labels, that have access to the marketing channels for music to build software cheap for the masses then sell add on marketing and distribution services. Basically, the printer/ink model would work wonders here. You create an inexpensive one off recording software solution then upsell buyers into residual services like a configurable music website with integrated player, hosting, media buys on industry sites, internet radio buys, demo CD production, music distribution and marketing tutorials, etc. Labels could become resources for the public, aspiring artists and DJs not the ENEMY. If I were a label, I would start buying up small music technology companies or partnering with Apple and building a solid software solution, a social network akin to HULU but more like a radio station and a collection of resources for artists. And, if I were Billboard, I’d have already done this with my existing website! But, then again, maybe that’s what Google has planned for Google Music Search. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Labels should become software companies. If sales of music recording software is increasing and recorded music sales are declining, it makes sense for labels, that have access to the marketing channels for music to build software cheap for the masses then sell add on marketing and distribution services. Basically, the printer/ink model would work wonders here. You create an inexpensive one off recording software solution then upsell buyers into residual services like a configurable music website with integrated player, hosting, media buys on industry sites, internet radio buys, demo CD production, music distribution and marketing tutorials, etc. Labels could become resources for the public, aspiring artists and DJs not the ENEMY. If I were a label, I would start buying up small music technology companies or partnering with Apple and building a solid software solution, a social network akin to HULU but more like a radio station and a collection of resources for artists. And, if I were Billboard, I’d have already done this with my existing website! But, then again, maybe that’s what Google has planned for Google Music Search. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
