When you dictate the price!

faceman

Mods, please dont move this to music!

Radiohead announced they are to releasing their next album shortly and it will be only available from their website. However in a mad twist, as a band who dont like the mark up stores and distributors put on cd's, they are asking you the consumer to choose the price you are willing to pay when ordering from their site!

It got me thinking. What if this was the norm with most consumerables? Ok the urge to pay £1 was very tempting at first but then i thought, hang on i like this band. The dosh is going to them. Maybe i should pay a fiver or even a tenner...

Would you feel guilty? What do you think about their idea?

AlmightyCushion

I'd pay -€1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 that would show them.

HammerHeadGym

faceman wrote:

...Would you feel guilty? What do you think about their idea?

The problem with the honour system is there is so little of it left...

whiskeyman

Bit of a PR stunt if you ask me... to suit their image too.
They obviously aren't short of a few bob.

Terry

faceman wrote:

Mods, please dont move this to music!

Well I was thinking of moving it to LTI because they really are one of the most depressing bands I have ever heard (my opinion), but I really don't want to remind the depressed people who use that forum regularly of the existence of radiohead.

Pighead

Its a bit like subscribing to boards. Theres no obligation to subscribe but if you're impressed by the service and want to give a little back then the option is there.

Apart from Pighead, people who don't subscribe are the absolute lowest of the low. Leeching off the system, always taking but never giving.

Every single person who uses boards, apart from Pighead, ought to sit down and scold themselves for being so mean and tight for not paying that extra few quid.

The guy

whiskeyman wrote:

Bit of a PR stunt if you ask me... to suit their image too.
They obviously aren't short of a few bob.

+1

Pighead

The guy wrote:

+1

Whats all this +1 crap. Can you not just say "The whiskeyman fella makes a good point and I'd be inclined to agree with him" .

Listen the guy Pigheads not having a go at you but c'mon don't be afraid of using your keyboard, let all those words out and show the people you've got something to say.

If Pighead were in a conversation with somebody and he replyed with a +1 the conversation would be ended quicksmart and there would probably be a swift kick to the bollox administered as well.

AlmightyCushion

Pighead wrote:

Whats all this +1 crap. Can you not just say "The whiskeyman fella makes a good point and I'd be inclined to agree with him".

+1

Pighead

AlmightyCushion wrote:

+1

Cheers AlmightyCushion, Pighead appreciates the support. It can be a lonely and unpopular path when you're job is to educate the kiddies.

AlmightyCushion

Pighead wrote:

It can be a lonely and unpopular path when you're job is to educate the kiddies.

+1

GLaDOS

AlmightyCushion wrote:

+1

The AlmightyCushion fella makes a good point and I'd be inclined to agree with him

Pighead

ScienceNerd wrote:

The AlmightyCushion fella makes a good point and I'd be inclined to agree with him

Pigheads work here is done.

Cheeky_gal

Pighead wrote:

Pigheads work here is done.

eeeh why do you always refer to yourself as lyk another person Pighead?? Bit odd....not too familiar with ya now on this... tho u seem to be preeeetty popluar round here!

And what ever happened the "yore ma" thing...haven't seen that in aaaaages!

_blank_

I'm going to download it for free.

Or else pay a penny if they do actually want some money.

Come on people, you all know you are going to do the same, most of you probably do it anyway with other artists who don't do anything like this.

Cheeky_gal wrote:

And what ever happened the "yore ma" thing...haven't seen that in aaaaages!

Look here
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=304451

Charter wrote:

YORE MA!!!




Right, it's an old one, but it has become prevalent in recent weeks.
Give it a rest.
It's amusing in the right context, but it is not needed in every single thread.
Contests to see who can get in there first will result in a ban, unless it is used in context.
Randomly posting it in any thread just so you got in there first will result in a ban.

Hey, look. I got it in on this thread first. /bans self.

FunkZ

AlmightyCushion wrote:

+1

Whats all this +1 crap. Can you not just say "The whiskeyman fella makes a good point and I'd be inclined to agree with him".

Cake Fiend

Cheeky_gal wrote:

And what ever happened the "yore ma" thing...haven't seen that in aaaaages!

You've only been here five minutes

AlmightyCushion

Well bands make most of their money from touring and merchandising. Seeinig as there is little or no distribution or advertising costs associated with this album all they have to cover is the cost of making the album which could have actually been very small. This is most likely an attempt to get radioheads name in the news and spread through word of mouth.

Giblet

God, keep on topic for a few minutes at least.

Giblet

Lazy banned forever.

gurramok

AlmightyCushion wrote:

Well bands make most of their money from touring and merchandising. Seeinig as there is little or no distribution or advertising costs associated with this album all they have to cover is the cost of making the album which could have actually been very small. This is most likely an attempt to get radioheads name in the news and spread through word of mouth.

Its a start ain't it?

Maybe they are putting the point across that their album nevermind the latest Westsh1t's album nor the average new release are not worth 20+ euros to buy which the dogs in the street know.

On this one, I feel they are reaching out to their fans by saying, judge our material on what a fair price is and not what the label/marketeers/distributor/stores feel it should be to maximize profit.

AlmightyCushion

gurramok wrote:

Its a start ain't it?

Maybe they are putting the point across that their album nevermind the latest Westsh1t's album nor the average new release are not worth 20+ euros to buy which the dogs in the street know.

On this one, I feel they are reaching out to their fans by saying, judge our material on what a fair price is and not what the label/marketeers/distributor/stores feel it should be to maximize profit.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying it's a stupid idea. It's a very good idea. Piracy is killing music sales and one way to stop it is to give the music away for nothing or next to it. I've just found out that radiohead are not tied to a record label. Record labels make a lot of money from album sales and the artists themselves make very little.
Maybe radiohead are thinking that they give the music away as a way of promoting the band (an album can be made for next to nothing these days). Then any profit they make from touring or merchandise goes straight to them.

Sinfonia

They're also offering a 'discbox' package for 40gbp, with the album on CD, double-disc vinyl, second CD with about 8 more songs, artwork, lyrics etc.
Plus the download.

It wouldn't have cost them anything extra to upload the album online, so they probably don't mind giving it away for free. They've always been in favour of file sharing too.

Giblet

SumGuy wrote:

It wouldn't have cost them anything extra to upload the album online, so they probably don't mind giving it away for free. They've always been in favour of file sharing too.

They'll be paying for bandwidth come the 10th, unless they use bit torrent or something.

AlmightyCushion

Giblet wrote:

They'll be paying for bandwidth come the 10th, unless they use bit torrent or something.

I doubt they'll be using bit torrent. There is a minimum charge on the album of 45p.

Goodshape

In answer to the actual question.... wouldn't feel guilty at paying the minimum but I actually like the band and would happily pay €10. And to be honest, if they were doing a normal €16 - €20 in the shops CD release, I'd probably just download it for nothing and "maybe buy it later when I have the time / cash / whatever".

I think it's a fantastic idea.

Though I'll probably splash out the £40 for the box-set myself.

WindSock

Reminds me of 'Steal this album' by stystem of a down. Did anyone steal it from a shop?

I suppose radiohead are doing it because they know that it's just going to be downloaded for free anyways. Good idea though. I'd pay a few bob because they are ma fave.

Giblet

I didn't have to pay 45p.

indough

boreds wrote:

Reminds me of 'Steal this album' by stystem of a down. Did anyone steal it from a shop?

They just robbed that idea from 'steal this book'

Cheeky_gal

Cake Fiend wrote:

You've only been here five minutes

5 mins u joking?? More lyk 2 months my friend!

leninbenjamin

as a rule i never pay for MP3. that's because usually they are compressed too much, cost too much, come with ridiculous f*cking DRM these days and at the end of the day if me pays for something i like to be able to hold it in me hand.

if i wanted to give a band me monies i'd pay to go see them in concert.

Wertz

Radiohead? They'd have to pay me to take it TBH, but it's a fine idea...I've on occasion "acquired" stuff by artists that I didn't know of and afterward felt guilty to the point of going out and buying their CD...the irony being that they only get a small % of that money anyhow.

Bands and artists taking this up would work IMO...cutting out the big music stores and the likes of iTunes and their middlemen tactics means ultimately that you pay less for your music and that the artist receives more dividends...everyone's a winner except for the suits.

Dyr

two months is only five minutes in boards years.

Terry

Wertz wrote:

Radiohead? They'd have to pay me to take it TBH, but it's a fine idea...I've on occasion "acquired" stuff by artists that I didn't know of and afterward felt guilty to the point of going out and buying their CD...the irony being that they only get a small % of that money anyhow.

Bands and artists taking this up would work IMO...cutting out the big music stores and the likes of iTunes and their middlemen tactics means ultimately that you pay less for your music and that the artist receives more dividends...everyone's a winner except for the suits.

And then the bands get greedy.

Firetrap

If the files have DRM on them, I'm giving the miserable sods nothing. I refuse to pay for crippled music.

Goodshape

That's true -- they haven't, as far as I know, mentioned anything about the format or DRM on the downloads.

But I'd honestly be surprised if it's anything but good quality, DRM-free tracks. I mean it's free anyway if you want it to be free... so what's the point of DRM?

Wertz

Terry wrote:

And then the bands get greedy.

Yeah perhaps...but the only pitfall I can see is that this method really only works for established artists/bands; up and coming would not be able to afford to rely on the honour systme....but that said, we have stuff like myspace and sh*t now that enables so many bands to move up the ladder without the once essential help of a record label/company.

Another point someone made above is the use of lossy formats that you're paying good money for....the benchmark needs to be reset on the quality of music files being sold on to the public for tidy profit...higher compression made sense a few years back when storage was at more of a premium but it's so comparatively cheap for storage and necessary bandwidth now that there's really no excuse for music download sellers to keep using it.

Terry

Wertz wrote:

Yeah perhaps...but the only pitfall I can see is that this method really only works for established artists/bands; up and coming would not be able to afford to rely on the honour systme....but that said, we have stuff like myspace and sh*t now that enables so many bands to move up the ladder without the once essential help of a record label/company.

Another point someone made above is the use of lossy formats that you're paying good money for....the benchmark needs to be reset on the quality of music files being sold on to the public for tidy profit...higher compression made sense a few years back when storage was at more of a premium but it's so comparatively cheap for storage and necessary bandwidth now that there's really no excuse for music download sellers to keep using it.

Yeah. Good point.
What's DRM?

AlmightyCushion

Terry wrote:

Yeah. Good point.
What's DRM?

Digital Rights Management. It's a retriction built in to the song. It's usually used to restrict the amount f devices the song can be played on or how many times it can be copied.

Terry

AlmightyCushion wrote:

Digital Rights Management. It's a retriction built in to the song. It's usually used to restrict the amount f devices the song can be played on or how many times it can be copied.

Ahh. Got stung with that a couple of times alright.

Wouldn't even let me re-encode the song at a higher bit rate.

Firetrap

DRM is the progeny of Satan. If you buy a song off iTunes, you're not getting an mp3 but an m4p file which will only play on an iPod. You can't convert it into an mp3 and there's a limit on the number of computers it can be played on. The same thing applies to wma files which are sold by most other music stores - they'll play on certain mp3 players but not on an iPod. And, if you reformat your computer's hard drive a couple of times or get a new computer, you won't be able to play the file anymore. It's a high penalty to pay for your being honest and paying for your music.

Firetrap

Terry wrote:

Ahh. Got stung with that a couple of times alright.

Wouldn't even let me re-encode the song at a higher bit rate.

Just wondering why you'd re-encode the song at a higher bit rate? It's not going to improve the sound quality. They do sell the songs at a desperately low bitrate though :mad:

AlmightyCushion

Terry wrote:

Ahh. Got stung with that a couple of times alright.

Wouldn't even let me re-encode the song at a higher bit rate.

Yep it should be made illegal. It limits how you use something you legally own.

Terry

Firetrap wrote:

Just wondering why you'd re-encode the song at a higher bit rate? It's not going to improve the sound quality. They do sell the songs at a desperately low bitrate though :mad:

I was trying to get around the DRM thingy by re-encoding it.

indough

Can't you just burn a disc of the protected songs and import?

leninbenjamin

AlmightyCushion wrote:

Digital Rights Management. It's a retriction built in to the song. It's usually used to restrict the amount f devices the song can be played on or how many times it can be copied.

in some cases it's no more than legalized spyware/malware is what it is. anyone remember the Sony rootkit scandal?

also, i did a project in my IT course on DRM. i remember coming across a few resources saying that DRM is legally questionable. when you take ownership of something by the legal definition of ownership you can do whatever the f*ck you want with it... never thought to verify this seeing as i was taking a more techy viewpoint... anyone have a notion on/seen this stance before? anyway, came away with the general opinion thought that anyone who enforces DRM is a cNut and should be burned at the stake. Especially microsoft. God i hate microsoft for the crap they agree to with the music and video industry.

Ekancone

Terry wrote:

Well I was thinking of moving it to LTI because they really are one of the most depressing bands I have ever heard (my opinion), but I really don't want to remind the depressed people who use that forum regularly of the existence of radiohead.

LTI?

AlmightyCushion

leninbenjamin wrote:

in some cases it's no more than legalized spyware/malware is what it is. anyone remember the Sony rootkit scandal?

also, i did a project in my IT course on DRM. i remember coming across a few resources saying that DRM is legally questionable. when you take ownership of something by the legal definition of ownership you can do whatever the f*ck you want with it... never thought to verify this seeing as i was taking a more techy viewpoint... anyone have a notion on/seen this stance before? anyway, came away with the general opinion thought that anyone who enforces DRM is a cNut and should be burned at the stake.

That sony thing was a disgrace. How companies can get away with this is a joke. I find it funny that people who download things illegally have no restrictions as to what they do with it whereas people who pay get fúcked over. Treat your customers like criminals, great idea there lads.

AlmightyCushion

daithifleming wrote:

LTI?

Long term illness.

Terry

daithifleming wrote:

LTI?

Long term illness

leninbenjamin

AlmightyCushion wrote:

That sony thing was a disgrace. How companies can get away with this is a joke. I find it funny that people who download things illegally have no restrictions as to what they do with it whereas people who pay get fúcked over. Treat your customers like criminals, great idea there lads.

actually have you heard about Apple potential new update to the iPhone? turns it into a brick if you unlock it... but unlocking a phone itself is legal, you've paid for it so you own it. as long as you don't charge for the actions of unlocking it apparently. they really are just taking the piss these days...