When I was still in High School I worked at Great Adventure in Jackson, NJ. During my tenure at this minimum wage job I made quite a few friends who worked in food operations and was privy to their gripes and frustrations. As I remember, one of their biggest headaches came from a standing edict by management with regards to soft drinks.
In Great Adventure every cup had to be filled to the top with a finely crushed ice before the soda was added. It didn’t take a genius to figure out why. The more ice used the less actual soda went in the cup. This was in the days before super sizing, when it finally dawned on the bean counters that the actual amount of syrup used in cup of soda was fiscally insignificant. Back in the 80’s, middle managers honestly thought they were generating more profit by this dubious practice. It was a pretty expensive cup of soda too, yet if a customer asked for no ice to counter this tactic they were charged an additional $0.25 for the pleasure.
Needless to say, consumers were quite dissatisfied by the practice if not downright angry about it. Still, on a hot July day folks lined up for drinks as they had little option – other than to complain. They complained about the price, they complained about the ice, they complained that management was pretending to be deaf to their complaints. Management did provide tap water at these stands – without ice and for the same price as a soft drink.
Security had to get involved too. Not from angry consumers on the line, but to look for mothers trying to sneak beverages into the park. Yup, mothers who turned to crime to affordably hydrate their children. But, it was an issue of value more than anything else. In the end those who purchased soft drinks were mostly paying for ice; cola flavored ice after a few draws on the straw drained the true amount of coke in that cup.
Related Posts
- Now The RIAA Wants You To Believe That You Should Be Paying Much, Much More For CDs
- Fewer People Paying for Music Downloads – NPD
- MPAA paying off NYPD?
- UK Youth Survey: Paying for Music is a Luxury
- Paying For What?
Loading ...
and still to this day McDonalds across North America do the same thing.
DRM on music at $0.99 a song is pretty extreme.
DRM on a new movie to watch for 24 hrs at $3-5.00 seems very fair. Its only like renting a video Its not like you are buying the movie.
There’s nothing wrong with DRM as a technology – its just when its employed to rip off consumer. That’s the content provider not the technology.
I can’t see how you can ever have movies on demand and huge amounts of content providers buying into digital home models without the opportunity to protect content.
I haven’t got a problem with DRm at the right price on appropriate content.
As for your Ice anology – I don’t get it? How does DRM water down the content?
“As for your Ice anology – I don’t get it? How does DRM water down the content?”
Economics 101: Its an negative feature that lowers the demand curve and thus the price consumers are willing to pay per unit.
To sum:
Media=$X
Media+DRM=$Y
$X=Demand Price
DRM= -N
$Y= (X+(-N))
Well if DRM is in a product you’re renting then no the analogy doesn’t work. You don’t rent coke. If it’s DRM in a product you’re being told you’re buying then the analogy is valid. You’re paying extra for something you’re not getting
You see they say download this song and give us money. We the customer of course equate that with what we’re used to thinking of as a download. We get our download with the sweetness of being able to take it store it where we want use it the way we want convert it play it where and how we want. So we buy it get it take a sip and “What the hell is this? This isn’t what I ordered.” I didn’t want ice..er…I mean DRM.