If you’ve ever had Economics 101, and even if you haven’t, you’ve probably heard about this ‘puzzle’ of sorts:

You and a stranger are offered 10 dollars. In order to receive it, you must propose a way to divide up this 10 dollars between you and the stranger. If the stranger rejects your division proposal, neither of you gets anything, otherwise it is divided as you directed. You won’t meet this stranger again and this game is only played once. What division do you propose?

Economists use this to explain the concept of economic rationality. Rationally speaking, the economically correct division is 9.99 for you, and 0.01 for the stranger. The stranger, if economically rational, will accept, because 1 cent is more than 0 cents. And thus, as you are also economically rational, you want to maximize your gains, so that’s what you propose.

These same economists will call Radiohead’s offering of their new album, In Rainbows, for ‘free’ (pay whatever you think it’s worth, including nothing), a sucker’s proposal. Clearly everyone would pay nothing — you get the same album regardless of how much you pay. And yet Radiohead is reported to have made to the tune of 10 million USD inside of a month. This wasn’t even expected; Radiohead’s bold move to release the album in this way was designed primarily to sell out concerts (which it has, all 21 of them). One might claim listeners are paying to ensure Radiohead will continue to make music, but Radiohead is not the kind of group that is pressed for cash, and I think they’ll keep making music even if they had to pay to do so. Thus, a rational economic human being truly has absolutely no reason to pay for this album.

So, how’s it work then? Are there are 10 million USD’s worth of idiots on this planet?

No. Human decency is simply an effective motivator. These album sales aren’t the first time the economists were wrong about humanity’s willingness to pay money just to be fair, instead of to optimize personal gain.

Reports that record labels are reconsidering this model abound, but I don’t think the record industry can afford it: This distribution model doesn’t NEED a record label. You can just record your complete song someplace, and pay some serious hosting provider to take care of distribution, and that’s all you need to do. Costs of renting studio time and bandwidth bills don’t amount to enough to require the vast pockets of a record label. The record industry’s clout with the radio can still help launch a successful music career. However, I don’t know about you, but I never listen to radio anymore. I might have a look at the iTunes top 100 from time to time, and I check Last.fm for song suggestions.

And thus we’ve come full circle, because in a world where music is distributed on a ‘pay what you think is fair’ model, with distributed recommendation engines, is economically far more efficient. It cuts out large swathes of middle men. Giving radiohead 10 million dollars was a smart move after all!