The band Radiohead is trying a new business model. Download their new album and pay whatever you think it's worth.
[S]inger Thom Yorke told TIME, “I like the people at our record company, but the time is at hand when you have to ask why anyone needs one. And, yes, it probably would give us some perverse pleasure to say ‘F___ you’ to this decaying business model.”
Will this be profitable? How much would you pay for a song or album if you got to name the price? Would you pay the going rate, be generous or a free rider?
55 comments:
I'd say this might be profitble as the labum would be downloaded by people whi like Radiohead and they may pay for it as thet would like the band to make some money. Personally, I'd pay about $10`so that I can also have the sattisfaction that I bought, not stole it.
Marta Gabler 2nd
Cori Fuller 5
Most likely Radiohead will lose a large amount of money. Those who like their music are willing to pay full price for their cd but wont because they do not have to. I would probably not pay anything over $5 since they are letting me decide, although I would never pay less than $1 for a whole cd, its someone's job and they deserve recognition ofr their hard work.
Tyler L.
the music industry has to do something different than it is doing now. record sales contuine to fall. the music industry is now more and more reliant on concerents and roalties for songs than record sales. this approach makes scense because if someone is willing to pay $1 for an album, that is $1 more that is recieved than if the person downlaoded it else where. on another note though, once that $1 gets split up between taxes, record lables, bands, song writers, managers, etc. it doesn't turn into much.
What would I pay? I would pay as small an amount as possible. I like to take advangtage when something's inexpensive. I don't think this new business model is necessarily good for the economy as a whole, but I would deffinitely take advantage of it.
Whitley C. -1st
Thomas G. 1st
I'd probably pay $5 for the album, if anything at all. I don't know why they would decide to try such a strange strategy. All the musicians complain about pirating music, but they're basically telling people to do it. The only way this would make sense is if they get a huge bonus from their label for selling a certain number of cds.
Derek Doss-2nd
Interesting idea. But a really bad one. So now there making it legal to pay nothing if you want to for music, doesn't much help the problem of bootlegging. People are going to pay as little as possible plain and simple, it's the society we live in. I'd pay as little as possible. Or just bootleg it. :)
Rebecca S. 5th
If i thought the album was good enough to download in the first place, i would probably pay the "going rate". The new business model is basically saying piracy is okay but it may benefit the band because any money they receive from honest customers is more than they would have received with the current system.
Kristen E. 2nd p.
this is the stupidest idea that i have heard of. everyone has a completely different sense of value and what things are worth. therefore, what's keeping people from paying .o1 cent a song? you could get 100 songs for a dollar. its a very poor concept for marketing online song sales. that kinda makes my brain sad for the person that came up with that.
personally it would have to depend on what the song was and how much i liked it to say how much i would pay. i think a good standard cost is $1-1.25 a song.
Kristen E. cont'd.
I would probably go with the going rate just because i like to support the artist who's music im listening to. If i want them to keep supplying me with new albums, tours and such then they kinda need money from the consumer.
Michael Moffitt-2nd
Wow, i would definately have to say that this is the dumbest career move ever. Sure you'll have the select few that are willing to pay the going rate and perhaps even more, but anyone with any kind of sense at all is going to pay the least amount possible.
-Olivia M. 2
Leah B. - 2nd
I don't know whether or not it is a smart move by not having a fixed price, but if they are trying to persuade those of their listeners, who would otherwise use a free download source such as Limewire, to donate they might have success. l personally see that the audience will predict their success. If their listeners are among those that would use iTunes as opposed to Limewire than perhaps the flow of revenue from album sales will decrease.
I would love to be able to say that I would want to support the artist and their work of art by paying the going rate and maybe even more, but I am not that self-righteous. My id would have a fight with my super ego and the concsience would lose. I would pay my one cent, happily listen to my new (and very inexpensive) music, muse over the great bargain I got, and not think anything more about it... and why should I -- it's not like I'm stealing.
laura h 2nd
Lindsay N. 1st period
I dont think Radiohead's new business model will be profitable at all. I actually find it somewhat ridiculous. No one wants to pay more than they have to on anything. By giving people that choice they will sacrafice what people are willing to pay for what people want to pay. I'm sure few people will still pay the full price to be kind but, for the most part, i think their profits will drop.
Good for Radiohead for trying to step out and make a change, but I seriously doubt it will be a profitable one. With our society today, I am sure that most people will rip them off and pay for the cd for less than it is worth.
I like Radiohead but not enough to pay full price for the whole album if I'm given a choice. However, if it happened to be a certain musician(s) that I am greatly devoted to and whom I highly respect, I would happily pay the going rate for the album simply because I would want that musician to get every bit of success that they deserve.
=]
Kaci Pickering--5th
dang, i would just take the album and use my money to buy gas...jeez whats wrong with the world these days: if life gives you lemons, take it and spend your money on something else
Michael H.-1st period
the way this works is you pay what you want on top of a $0.91 service charge.
this is only until December when Radiohead releases the album through Paralophone with EMI encoding at $25.
they were able to do this because the EMI contract they had expired in 2005.
Erin F. 1st
By allowing the american populace to pick their price radiohead is widening their fan base and in turn creating a new form of fan appeal. This could be the start of a new form of musical merchandising and could become and iconic moment in musical history.
emily howard 5th period
yeah... i dont think this idea will be very profitable... but its not a bad idea!
i wouldnt do it because they will probably get ripped off...
yup so this idea would probably be considered the worst ever...i know about 1000000000 americans including myself would download the ablum and definately not pay a cent
Matt Zielniski - um 5 period ?
Crystal R. 5th period
Well I don't think this is a very good idea!! Of course you might have some honest customers who would pay the "going rate" for the album but on the flip side you would also have people pay little to nothing for the album. As for me, I would probably pay about $1 per song!!!
its hard to say because even if the music is amazing... unless we aren't the ones paying then i would probably not take it for free , but pretty cheap.
Bethany Rumph -2
I'm not quite sure what I would pay. To pay any where near the market price it would have to be amazing music, because often times you can buy a cd because you know one song is amazing but then the rest turn out to be horrible.
Sarah Henderson-1st
Well, we'd find out how much people like the album by how much they paid for it, but,and I am pro-radiohead, people are going to have different views on the value of a song. Somebody might pay $.01 just so they don't feel guilty, while someone else will pay $1 a song because they think it's worth it.
Becky B- 1
John Ross N
5th
It is an interesting experiment. However, I doubt whether it will prove profitable. They seem to be taking after the business model of Times Square's Naked Cowboy. The Naked Cowboy is probably one of the best paid and most famous street performers in history. Countless women have had their picture taken with the man patroling the sidewalks and streetcorners with nothing but guitar briefs boots and a hat. He asks for money for his music but doesn't demand it much like the new scheme by Radiohead. However, the Naked Cowboy has a much better chance of getting money because he wears so little. Few people pay for music nowadays anyway and if a band is offering it free legally, only moral qualms stand in the way and unfortunately those seem to be getting less and less powerful. Personally, I would pay for the music--for the same reason I tip the car hop at Sonic. But for most people who began leaving some dough behind for the band, once the newness of the idea wore off they would take the music as they did before but now legally. I would pay about 70 cents per song because I figure that would be about what a each song on a CD would cost after the middle man was removed, but I'd have to give the Naked Cowboy a dollar so that I could say, "Hey, once, I gave the Naked Cowboy a dollar!" 70 cents just doesn't sound as good in that situation.
JR would give money to a half naked pedophile walking in the streets...But if Radiohead is ignorant enough to think that the idea of letting me decide what I think I should have to pay is a good plan, then they deserve to make nothing. I would give them a penny, laugh, and walk away.
Eric R. 2nd
it wouldnt be immediately profitable because most people including myself wouldnt pay for the album. it might pay off in the long run from increased publicity and more people would try their music
jb m. pd 2
I would pay the going rate, but I think that many people would use this system to get the CD for way less than it's worth. I don't know...to me it's not a very bright idea.
Lauren Roach 5th
I do not see how the is going to be profitable in any way. Yes there will be those dedicated fans who will probably pay a reasonable amount, but im sure the rest will do what we do best... and download it for free.
Tarah W. 2nd
I dont think this new business model will be profitable for the band because many people would take advantage of the freedom they are given and pay as little as possible. I would personally pay about $1 just because they are giving me the choice.
Gerardo De La O 1st
Justin N. 2nd Period
I think Radiohead's idea is interesting, but I don't think it will be profitable. I think I would pay about 20% if I liked the band, because I would want them to do well. However, if people are offered a really cheap price, instead of the normal one, they would take the really cheap price, regardless of their liking of the band.
Interesting that you posted this. I preordered my copy of In Rainbows last Tuesday. From what I've been told, artists earn about $1-2 on every cd sale. I paid five, then got taxed $.50 for using my American debit card.
I think that the idea sounds great, but in reality it is a unintelligent idea. the band makes money off of their music, and most people would just get it for free if they had a choice, so the band would be getting way less than they deserve, and that might lead to the end of that band. i don't think it should be up to us how much we pay for a song because its not our music.
Gina P (2nd)
Regan Doyal 5th
I think that this buisness model is too idealistic and wouldn't be profitable. Die hard fans might be generous and pay but first time listeners would probably take it for free.
I think it's an interesting idea but it won't be profitable. Personally I'd probably pay the going rate or just a little less.
Joe B.
5th
Maggie C.
5th
I don't believe that this will be profitable for the band because people would take advantage of it. Personally, I think I would pay part of the full price.
I think that it would even out.
Some people are going to be more generous.
Some are going to pay what a usual album would cost.
Some are going to pay a penny.
But in the long run I think that this may be a profitable idea.
I personally would pay about 15 dollars, the average price of a CD.
Too bad I have never heard of radiohead in my life.
Shannon H - 2nd
Alexa Daniel 2nd
I would like to think that most people, being the kind and giving individuals that they are, would readily pay the going rate plus some for the freedom, however, that doesn't seem very reasonable. I know the temptation to pay the least amount possible would be very hard for me to overcome unless I had an intense loyalty to the band. In the end, I think greed defeats morals in modern society.
Betsy E. 2nd Period
If I had the opportunity to determine the price I paid for an album, I would feel it was my duty to explain whatever price I chose (because, well, I am a little bit anal when it comes to that sort of thing). For instance, if this were a Jessica Simpson CD, I would have no qualms about mailing an envelope containing one penny and a letter calling attention to her lack of talent propriety.
Bennett W. 5th
I normally pay as little as possible to begin with so if I could pay nothing then there you have it. It comes down to questioning whether or not listening to someone's music for free is wrong. On the one hand music shouldn't be about money but on the other we have entertainment which probably deserves some kind of payment or charity. When we download music off the internet we aren't really gaining anything tangible to begin with. The only thing that changes is the polarity of metal in certain places on a hard drive. Intellectual property is hard to put a price on....
Allen J. 1st
I think the cd market will loose a decent amount of profits but it will even out in the end. If the band is good enough for a wide variety of people to enjoy, the exposure to the band will be greatly enhanced by the freedom of the price of the cd. If the band gets more exposure to more people, more people will come to their concerts, and that's where the real money is. Personally, I wouldn't pay a cent for a Radiohead cd, or any other that was offered to me for free for that matter, and that's why I just rip a lot of my friend's cds instead of buying any.
Brittney O.
5th period
The idea behind this model is interesting. If we lived in a world where there were more generous people than greedy and people that would rather give than take, it could very well be profitable. But seeing as how this idealistic world will never exist, I think they will end up losing money. I believe there would be a few honest, generous people willing to pay a fair price, but I also believe there are many more that would take it free. I would like to get it for free, but would feel bad if I didn't give at least something for it. For it to work, it all comes down to morals...something that few people have anymore.
I don't think it is profitible, but its kinda like how Velvet Revolver was going to release their newest album and release all of their songs as singles and let the radio stations decide which ones they wanted to play...They all have already made enough money in their life that they can waste it and allow a radio station to play what they wanted...Radiohead has made enough in their time to do that and still be good financial wise etc. Personally, I think that everyone will just keep downloading for free since the option is there...
Carrie C. 5th period.
Matthew K. 1st
I think the chance of making any kind of profit in this experiment is very slim. They are obviously doing pretty well if they can rely on the "honesty" of the consumer. I would give them something small, im not completely cheap.
Danielle V. 1st
Radiohead's business model will not be profitable. Most people download music off the internet for free, and very rarely buy an album. When something comes without a price tag, usually people pay the least possible price. I honestly wouldn't pay very much, if anything at all for the album. In the end, I think that Radiohead will find that society is only conserned about itself and not the success of others.
If this is a group that you really like and have purchased their other albums, instead of stealing them off the internet, then you should pay a reasonable price for downloading the album. That cost should be less then what you would pay for the CD from the store, since there are no materials and production cost now. I would pay $2.50 for the download, since they are not dealing with any third party, such as iTunes or the cost of CD production and sales through a third party vendor. Their production costs for the music should be quickly recouped, and the rest is profit for the group.
Melissa Coquelin
2nd Period
Justin Pena
I dont think that this would be all that profitable to the band because it would taken advantage of. I would just pay the full price.
hmmm.. well that's just economic suicide in my mind right there. I mean, I don't think any more people will pay for it just because the price is left in the hands of the consumer. $.99 a song is already cutting it slim compared to how it was a decade ago for upcoming artists. It's just a big publicity stunt and maybe immeadiatly rewarding to the band just due to publicity but it certainly could not be a common effective form of income. When the price is available at less than the usual standard, curious listeners will want to bank on the chance to save money, and even the devoted following will buy into it eventually. If ppl want to support the band, they won't do it by paying a high price for the album, they will do it by using that purchasing power elsewhere, whether it be memorbilia, concerts, etc.. but then again, I dont neccessarily think so. It's not like people will just say "aww, how sweet, the band is offering the product at a cheaper price, I owe them a favor now!" this won't pay off, atleast not for long.
Kayla H. (5th)
Ty P. 5th
If I had a lot of respect for the artist and liked their music I would probably pay close to the going rate. However, for many artists that perhaps I only wanted the CD for one song or something of the such, I would probably be cheap and pay very little. This strategy will most likely bring exposure to the artists, which in turn will bring money, so it may not be that bad.
Taylor P. 1st
If the album was good enough in my taste to be worth the going rate or maybe even more so then I would definately be generous with it. I believe that if an artist is going to put so much effot into a work, whatever it may be, they deserve a reward for doing so.
If the band was good I might pay something around the going rate, but chances are I'd just take it for free because I'm lazy.
- The Wasiuta, 2nd Period
If I got to name a price I would take full advantage of it and go as low as I could go. I might add in a couple of dollars if it was amazing. I know that sounds really bad. But, if I can name the price then i'm going to take full advantage of it.
Kim L (1)
Personally, I think this idea is insane. Yes, some people will probably pay full price just because they're a fan, but most people will pay nothing. I suppose I'd pay what I pay on iTunes which is 99 cents a song or $9.99 for the whole album.
Oops! The comment above was from me.
Madison G. 5th
the quality is bad.
you get what you pay for.
Post a Comment