I have to disagree with kings comment "he points out that if selling the same volume at better profits was that easy, many big acts would be fleeing the labels, and that's not happening". With the focus of music slipping into a digital format as opposed to a physical retailer it is much easier for a band to distribute their own material. One of the biggest drawbacks for bands the size of radiohead is manufacturing millions of cds is very costly. With downloading becoming more popular the need for actual cds lowers, thus removing one obstacle. The other drawback for bands has been promotion. I daresay that a band like radiohead is better at promoting themselves to thier fans than the label has ever been. They are technically profficient enough to reach thier own audience, do they really need a billboard? While I don't think that every band will be able to follow this blueprint, I deffinately see more established artist following suit.

The record company covers all sorts of cost that now have to come out of the band's take, so the purchase price has to be more than $1.50 for the band to actually get that amount after paying expenses. How much more? I've no idea.

As KK said, it ain't that much. The record company recoups the production, marketing, distribution, and promotion costs before the band gets a dime. That's why in the vast majority of record contracts, the only money the band makes is in the advance.

Not to mention that Radiohead will retain the masters and copyrights, which will yield more money in the years ahead. Usually the record company gets those too.

I decided to pay 5 pounds. I think $10 sounds about fair for a record these days.

I'm not a music person, in fact I will often have the radio off in my car so I can listen to the purring tone of my well maintained mid-80's Toyota. I've heard of the band, but can't say I've ever even heard any of their songs, and despite that I'll buy the digital download myself for $5.00 just out of respect for their tenacity, and out of spite for the labels.

Go Radiohead!

i figured that i used to pay about $16.00 for new releases back in the day when i shopped in a record store (hasn't happened for literally 3 or 4 years now)... and one of the last things i bought in a store at full price was "hail to the thief". i really admire the band musically and i love the idea of how they're selling this album BUT i'm giving up liner notes, album art and CD quality. i figured $15.00 was fair: still way more than i pay downloading from emusic, but not throwing money at the music either. 7.5 pounds plus shipping made it 7.95 pounds. now i just hope it doesn't suck.

$10.00.

Radiohead (in my opinion) deserve it and are worth every penny. Seems like a ridiculously small price to pay for a record I'll have for the rest of my life. And the people who made the record keep the lion's share of the profit. Isn't this one reason why we have technology?

Why are people being so stingy? What in the world makes you think that $5 or even $10 is a generous amount to pay for an album? Why is it that music seems to be the only art form where people expect to pay less and less for it as every year goes on?

Do you have any idea what goes in to making an album of music? It's massive. Record label or not, art deserves to be treated as such. This is something you get to have and re-use for the rest of your life.

When are people going to realize that the less and less they pay musicians to create, the less and less music will exist in the world?

worth every penny. I would've paid more. it's gonna be a real beaut, folks.

Paid 6 pounds. Plus .45 for credit card transaction.

5 or 10 bucks, depending on the quality of the files. I'll wait to decide.

I *don't* p2p music, but the record companies deserve to get overthrown after doubling the price of albums in the 80's (in the transition to CDs) and never turning back. I'm sick of those ghouls laughing all the way to the bank on the backs of everyone (artists and consumers) who make their business possible. I'd rather they cried their way to their grave.

BTW, I'd completely endorse iTunes (and don't mind the easily-worked-around DRM) for giving 65% to the indie artists, if only they'd offer the best possible quality for the 99 cent rate. Generally, I hope any artist would bail on every other middleman and go the 65% route with iTunes. Win+Win+a big "in your face" to the parasites who deserve it.

Good show, Radiohead. Viva la revolucion.

10 pounds.

I obviously haven't purchased yet, but I'm so marvelously filled with righteous dignation (I'm not even a huge Radiohead fan) that I'm gonna buy on 10/10 and pay a buck a song. Nice work carrying the banner, lads.

I'll pay $5.00 for the download. If I knew that the download was lossless (i.e., not some lossy format like mp3) I'd be willing to pay more. I'm also less likely to pay full CD retail price for a download because I value the booklet and album art. I will, however, order the actual CD when it's released (unless the album stinks).

Ten Pounds...so roughly $20.00 US... since it's whatever I want to pay and that I value Radiohead as an artist and applaud this experiment, I thought it was a fair value.