"I couldn't possibly fail to disagree with you less."
8 October 2007Whatever the traffic will bearI'm contemplating offering £4.50 — a tad over nine bucks — to download Radiohead's new album In Rainbows, and after all, the price is up to me. Rationale: I'm not exactly a major fan, but I think I want to show support for this decidedly-unusual marketing technique. What would you do? Posted at 4:21 PM to Fileophile , TANSTAAFL , Tongue and GrooveYou offer a fair price (though below what the album would cost here in the shops at around £10).As I haven't got to hear a preview then it's hard for me to place a value on it(no £40 box set please). If the album is, as reported by Tom Yorke, akin to 'OK Computer' then I'm happy to pay full price (album downloads for me should be no more than £6). If it's akin to 'Kid A' then £3.99 tops. Posted by: Emalyse at 5:16 PM on 8 October 2007In these parts, I'd expect the album to come out at $12 or so (a hair under £6). And I have to figure that even at half that for the download, the band is getting more actual cash than they would have received from a Major Label. Posted by: CGHill at 9:45 PM on 8 October 2007the band is getting more actual cash than they would have received from a Major Label. By itself a convincing argument. Posted by: McGehee at 9:13 AM on 9 October 2007The whole idea seems to have been received well. Hopefully artists can get achieve more viable (and honest?) direct sales to their niche fans until such time as the whole thing goes full circle and groups decide they need the hype and marketing and associated middle men of a major label again. Posted by: Emalyse at 10:08 AM on 9 October 2007Certainly Trent Reznor is willing to cut out the middleman, at least so far. Posted by: CGHill at 10:27 AM on 9 October 2007The download is done: I offered £4.75, to which a 45p service charge was added, making the total £5.20, or around $10.68. Per the receipt, this will appear as a charge from WASTE PRODUCTS LTD. Posted by: CGHill at 1:32 PM on 14 October 2007 |