[ufitsy]

Its a novel idea to advertise your next album as "pay what you want"

For those that don't know, Radioheads new album is offered online first and punters can actually pay any price they want - apparently even nothing is an option (for pikeys).

What bothers me about this is that 5 years ago Radiohead went to extraordinary lengths to remove their products from peer 2 peer web sites - fair enough, they have a right to protect their product.

It is is one thing embracing technology and seeing it as an opportunity, but to now say that they are now offering their music to all does not add up.

Is it a case of you can have it for nothing as long as we say its ok and get some publicity or am I missing something.

[Sonic67]

I thought it was quite clever.

I imagine in a £10 CD some goes to production, some to the music store, some to the record company, some for transport etc. So from all of that I imagine Radiohead get maybe a pound or two.

This way many customers might pay nothing, some £5, some £10 so it should work out around the same or better I think for them.

[njp]

Originally Posted by ufitsy

Is it a case of you can have it for nothing as long as we say its ok and get some publicity or am I missing something.

I don't see it as hypocritical to try a new way of marketing your product. They think they'll make more money by allowing their customers to choose how much to pay (and bear in mind there are virtually no distribution costs, and no record label taking a cut), even if some of them decide to get it for free. After all, those people would just get it free from the usual sources later on. And being first to do it isn't going to hurt either, with all the free publicity. And then there's always plan B - the physical (and rather expensive) CD to be released some time later...

Smart move, I think.

[Bilbob]

I'd be more impressed if I could pay what it's worth AFTER I'd downloaded and listened to it...

Beforehand, I've no idea what it's worth!!

[unique]

being a radiohead fan, i vaguely recall some kind of statement along the lines of the band not caring too much about the mp3s on fan sites (who, at least used to, have loads of rare mp3s of live tracks etc for download), but it was the record company EMI who wanted them removed as they owned copywrite or publishing rights

the last album or two by radiohead was leaked a fair time in advance of release, but it didn't seem to affect sales, which have dropped greatly, i presume due to both market shift, as well as change of direction musically, and the band not being flavour of the month anymore (now TM to muse). i think they know that people will download the album for free from the usual places if they don't want to pay for it, and the fans will buy it anyway, so they aren't really losing out

btw, even if everyone downloaded it for nothing, the album box set (the only physical purchase available) being sold only to fans at £40 a pop, will bring in the real money for them. with no record label, the band write, record, press and sell direct, so make much bigger profits per sale. the "pick your own price" to download just gives them more promotion to sell the £40 set. there isn't a single £10 cd being sold, only the box set

[miceri]

'Rainbows' will be distributed for download purchases without being assigned to a record label.

Previously, as noted by Unique, Radiohead don't care so mouch what and how the music is obtained, it was the record label who had a hissy fit.

So now, they will release the electronic version 'label independant'. At a cost that suits you. Personally, if I were into downloading (legally) music, then I would still pay the full amount as I think they are worth it. And the cash isn't going to the greedy studio executives.

However, I like the feel of the shiny packaging, and manhandling my products! So I will buy the boxed set of bits and pieces...

The pendulum is indeed swinging.

//miceri

Radiohead fan for 16+ years and counting!

[wombar]

Good on them is what I say. I'm not a massive Radiohead fan, but still enjoy listening to some of their old stuff from time to time. Like others have said, it's generally record labels who "go after" P2P sharing as artists make such a pittance from albums it's not even funny.

Many bands make their real money from touring so aren't really that fussed how the album sells as long as they can sell out their tour. Record labels tend to make you sign a "soul stealer" these days which pretty much signs over every single aspect of the band including song copyrights, band name, everything.

Hopefully we're going to see a lot more of this. The future is not looking too bright for the big (greedy) labels, as more and more people are willing to do it themselves to get started. Home recording gear is horrendously cheap (comparatively) and you can get 90% of the quality in a studio recording with £3K worth of equipment. DIY is the future

[mjn]

They couldn't pay ME enough money to buy one of their albums. I will however offer a donation for them to never ever release another depressing CD.

[Toasty]

Radiohead and Charalatons have entered the new arena of managing their own distribution and I think it will work very well for them. However, I don't think this model will work for new, upcoming bands as the market would become flooded with cheap / free mp3's and it will be difficult to distinguish good from bad.

I think a new band management style is required, where reliance on physical music sales is relaxed and promotion of merchandise and gigs heightened, which to me, would be a little scary for budding new song writers and artistes!

[Strobe]

I 'bought' the new album download for free Why pay when you have the option to get something for nothing!

And no, I'm not a pikey!