I don't get this Amazon CD vs. MP3 pricing

[decay]

as long as it's not me, $tevie

sort of like cars; someone buys it new, sells it to the next person, etc.

some people keep their new car til it dies.
others buy used from the 1st owner.
still others don't mind a 15 year old car for $1500.

[vision63]

I'm fondling a Foo Fighters CD as we speak.

[space-time]

vision63 wrote:
I'm fondling a Foo Fighters CD as we speak.

Watch out for penis CD Captivus

[RAMd®d]

No kidding. I thought the point of the thread was to illustrate you can get the MP3s and CD combo for less than just the MP3 album.

Sooo... Amazon has to adjust the pricing structure for mp3 "albums" every time they want to clear out a CD?

Or that they should adopt a pricing structure that precludes their ripping the CD for you if they sell a CD for less than normal?

Last I looked, physical CDs and their Amazon ripped mp3s generally cost more than the mp3 album alone. If the OP's scenario were the same for all CD sales (assuming there are no other issues), then I'd question the wisdom of Amazon's pricing.

So if somebody (Amazon) wants to unload a bunch of physical items that are taking up space but not selling, bang, they go on sale. Now maybe they should delete the AutoRip feature for those CDs. Or not. Some would see that as extra value, helping to retain customers.

mp3 albums pose far less difficulty in storage.

Bunny Trail Alert: I think $10 is overpriced for a low-quality bit-rate album. I'm at the point were Apple Lossless may be wasted on my ears, but 256K and 320K still sound worse. So I'll continue to buy CDs in general, and 256K mp3s on occasion.


I thought the point of the thread was to illustrate

Seriously?

Half the threads here routinely stray to varying degrees from The Point. Or get stupid answers that in no way illustrate anything relevant or intelligent.

Why should this thread be any different?

[pinkoos]

Thanks for the replies.