and I definitely see companies lowering the price in a certain region when they are trying to break into a new market etc..
Absolutely. Mostly, when competing, you lower your price versus similar products. Or you raise it, if you have a good brand with more perceived value (Apple, for instance). That's competition, and that is how you generally lever your way into an area.
Actually I can't see a good reason to prevent a company from releasing a product in a certain region sooner and cheaper than elsewhere, it is their product anyway.
I'm not trying to stop companies doing this, I don't want to pass an act of international law to compel them to apply the same price everywhere, I want them to realise that it's hurting their sales. I don't mind paying a little bit more for something than in the US, there are extra costs with bringing any product to another country, even digitally, but that doesn't justify more than doubling the price.
I understand that in the US, there's going to be more of that type of music, a higher background level, if you will. So they need to price competitively to sell. I also understand that in the UK and other countries, the background level might not be so high, so they can afford to charge a little more. But that argument is redundant now with the Internet. I can get any music I want within five, ten minutes. Even legally, there are bands releasing tracks, EPs, and albums for free on their websites. They often don't care what region you're in, and when they do the security is so light it's pretty much a knowing nod to the fact that people from other regions are going to DL it (e.g. a zip code checker. Now, if only there was a global information network that let you look up zip codes...).
The way I see it, the company is being a little spiteful. So, is it any surprise that people are a little spiteful in return, and pirate? Whenever you release anything now, you have to face the fact that you are competing against the pirates. You have to give people a reason not to pirate. The first unreasonable thing you do, you lose sales. The second, more sales. The third, more sales. And if a pirated version isn't available, and you're being difficult about your product (hello Ubisoft) people just won't buy it.
Pretending that the Internet only exists in avenues that work for you, and not the consumer, blows up in your face. In this example, they use the Internet to advertise to everyone. Everyone goes to the site, sees the album is available now, and toddles off to get it. But if you live in 95% of the world's population (or more accurately, the 1.75 billion or so who have access to the Internet) you're out of luck. But that same channel they use for advertising could be used for sales. They could sell the album there, to everyone.
Basically, the way I see it is this. I want the album. The album is not on sale to me. For no reason. So if I want it, I have to pirate it. Why do companies put people in this position in the first place? They have no reasonable explanation, other than "Well, if you wait a month and then pay twice as much, you can have it." which is going to fall flat on its face as an argument in any market.
*Company A want you to wait a month, and pay twice as much as when they were selling it to those guys over there.
*Company B want you to have it for free.
Except Company B are pirates, and all they ask (if torrenting) is you stay online for maybe an hour, uploading the file to others. It all occurs at a remove, you never see the artist suffer, you're helping rip off a bunch of arseholes in suits sat around a table going "We need to rape more markets!", and you have lost nothing and gained some music.
Obviously, that's not always accurate, but that's the perception of it. I mean, why am I here, writing this? Is the Internet not a salesman's dream, a virtual shop window where you can present your goods however you like and sell them to anyone in the world? They want to sell music, so sell me some bloody music
. Don't put people in this position where their choices are either the company losing out or themselves, because the company will end up bleeding.
The friend who recommended the band to me also mentioned they're touring the UK. There is no chance
I am going to see them. I wouldn't go if a ticket popped through my letterbox right now. As BB pointed out, the 5-10 minutes I spent futilely trying to spend money on them
whipped me up into a fine, creamy rage and I suspect I shall be here for quite some time raving about The Man.
If you're going to advertise something to people, make sure you sell it to them. As BB also pointed out, if they feel they need DRM to protect initial sales, fine, go ahead. Better yet, limit me to the two devices I listen to music on (my PC and my phone), and perhaps time-limit the DRM to three months, so that the first sales explosion is protected, and then I get to do whatever the Hell I want with my files. But for the love of God, sell it to me.
As it is, I'll see the album in a year or two in a bargain bin for £2, and I might buy it. By that time, at that price, the company will make no money, the artist will make no money, it's just the shop trying to get rid of dead stock.
Please don't kill me in X-COM AAR.
The aliens might.