Radiohead & the theory of giving

[Mama Lou]

All this discussion about Radiohead's new pay what you want album sounds a lot like a hat line to me.

Economists say if a person pays for something they could have otherwise gotten for free they are irrational beings. But still - people ARE paying for the album... and people DO pay for street shows, even though they are free to walk away at the end (cheap skates).

Generally 2/3 of the people who download the album have paid something, 1/3 download for free.
Does this seem close to the walk-off rate for most performers?

And, do you think if more items of value move to the pay-what-you-want format busking will become more or less lucrative?
If it is a normal mode of payment (pay what you want) won't people have already weighed in with their conscience on this "type" of thing before you even hat?

Article in the Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/opinion/14sun3.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[Peter Voice]

There is a very successful pair of vegetarian restaurants in Melb. called "Lentil As Anything" (a take on the name of a great local band called Mental as Anything) that have recently taken to putting on "new vaudeville" shows featuring some of Melb's best street performers.

They have no prices and you just pay what you think the meal is worth. They, and the performers, are doing quite well.

[Schuyler]

I think people are more likely to pay for something if they think the price is fair. I know I do. If you're told to pay exactly what you think is fair, it seems like good incentive to pay.

Also, I think the statistics of the album might be a little flawed. I know of several people who tried downloading for free just to see if it would work and then bought again at whatever cost they thought was fair (and one person who downloaded for free first to see how much he thought the album was worth). Yet I don't know of a single person who downloaded without paying and left things that way.

But that's just one guy.

[Mama Lou]

It seems to be a shift from thing's value being set based on the cost of production & mark-up to a personal evaluation of how much the item is worth to us.

Growing up poor in Kansas I was tought that paying full price is for chumps since there is a minimum of 50% mark-up on every item in the store. So when I look at items in a store, I see 50% overhead that I shouldn't be paying for a "Fair" price for the item.
But if I look at an item, like music, performance, or art that doesn't have a high cost of production once its been created (ok - yes - after the YEARS of practice & time you've put in) & then am asked what it's worth to me & my wellbeing - it is a completely different standard of worth.

At what balancing point do I feel I've been fair and can either sleep well at night - or experience the warm fuzzy feeling of giving when I didn't have to?

I've been to the Lentil as Anything show - and you're right, they're doing well. The room was completely packed - standing room until people were watching through the windows from outside! And there was a feeling of being "in" or of closeness of the audience (perhaps because you were sitting on other people's laps and could feel strangers breating on your neck...) but could this type of feeling have been created if there was a cover charge for the show??
I don't think so.
If someone paid $5 - they'd EXPECT a certain level of something... like to not be touching strangers.
But the energy that was created in the room was way cooler than any room where everyone has contractual expectations based on paying an amount at the door.