3 ms·
Hmmm... I didn't take his rationales seriously at all. I'm surprised you made the mental leap to think the stats might be made up, but not the leap to think tha
by ericb 16y ago
Hmmm... I didn't take his rationales seriously at all. I'm surprised you made the mental leap to think the stats might be made up, but not the leap to think that his cost based price might be fudged and provided solely to encourage sales at the higher pricepoint.
I just looked at the genius of guilt-based discriminant pricing, and was amazed it worked. (assuming honesty in reporting)
- tptacek 16y agoGuilt-based pricing has been tried in lots of places, and I'm unaware of an example where it's worked well. Radiohead seems to have had the most success, and they grossed less on In Rainbows than any of their label releases (they're a confusing example because their experiment was also about disintermediating the labels, which was a success).
- getonit 16y agoIn Rainbows being a failure is the recording industry's spin and, as usual, once you stop taking the cherry-picked data at face value and look at the big picture, you find the complete opposite is true: http://techdirt.com/articles/20081015/1640202552.shtml http://techdirt.com/articles/20081015/1640202552.shtml
- tptacek 16y agoNo, you are conflating two different issues. On the one hand, Radiohead demonstrated that disintermediating the major labels is a win (naturally, the industry wants to spin that). On the other hand, the response rate they --- one of the most popular and beloved rock bands of all time --- got from this promotion was... disheartening. Think of it this way: Radiohead demonstrated that anything, even letting customers set their own price, is better than working with a major label. That doesn't mean letting customers set their own price is an economically sound move by itself.