<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><link>http://tags.library.upenn.edu/tag/Digital+radiohead</link>
<title>PennTags Feed for /tag/Digital+radiohead</title>
<description>PennTags Feed</description>
<item><guid isPermaLink="true">http://tags.library.upenn.edu/makerecord/url/40727</guid>
<link>http://tags.library.upenn.edu/makerecord/url/40727</link>
<title>For Radiohead Fans, Does Free + Download = Freeload?</title>
<description>&lt;p&gt;ComScore. &amp;ldquo;Press Release: For Radiohead Fans, Does &amp;ldquo;Free&amp;rdquo; + &amp;ldquo;Download&amp;rdquo; = &amp;ldquo;Freeload&amp;rdquo;?&amp;rdquo; 5 November 2007.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This press release details a study of the online sales of Radiohead's "In Rainbows," an album the band released via a pay-what-you-want download model. The statistics obtained demonstrate clearly the presence of a "freeloader market," in which 60-62% of people will download an album for free when confronted with a pay-what-you-want option. The article offers a few different perspectives. Some experts are impressed that 40% of consumers are willing to pay "real money" for something they could get for free. Others question whether this model could be viable for less-established artists. Edward Hunter, a comScore analyst, states that this unique effort is important in that it eliminated a loss of profits due to illegal downloading.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Though these statistics are important, they are more interesting when confronted with data from (countless) other sources, which report that Radiohead's experiment was a likely success. Many different sources report that the profits made by Radiohead on In Rainbows were comparable to what they would have made under normal record-company distribution. Though those opinions and statistics can be found readily, the data regarding freeloaders is more unique to this article, which seems to expose the downside of pay-what-you-want models.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
