免費(fèi)的東西有多值錢？如果你聽(tīng)到有人免費(fèi)得到一些東西，你的第一反應(yīng)是什么？坐在一堆沒(méi)有用過(guò)的東西旁邊有多少是免費(fèi)的，和你買的卻沒(méi)有用過(guò)的東西相比起來(lái)你覺(jué)得有什么不同？你舍棄一些東西時(shí)不收分文，得到了什么，這些免費(fèi)的東西有什么價(jià)值？
A lot of questions, I know, but if you sit with them and take them seriously, you’ll probably notice a lot of inconsistencies in your thinking. The truth of the matter is that understanding “free” isn’t easy as we’d like to think.
問(wèn)題怎么問(wèn)都問(wèn)不完，我知道，但是如果你和它們坐在一起并且意識(shí)到問(wèn)題的嚴(yán)肅性的時(shí)候，你的腦海里可能會(huì)出現(xiàn)許多自相矛盾的想法。事實(shí)上如果我們?cè)敢馊ニ伎?，就?huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)理解“免費(fèi)”并不容易。
I wish I were smart enough to come up with this post on my own, but the reality is that it’s a synthesis of a few different conversations and observations. The main point is that we need to rethink our notions of “free,” especially as it relates to free information, and doing so could benefit us all.
我希望自己聰明得可以獨(dú)立去展開(kāi)這個(gè)話題，但是實(shí)際上這篇文章整和了一些對(duì)話，并進(jìn)行了一些觀察。主要的論點(diǎn)是我們要對(duì)“免費(fèi)”的概念重新思考，特別是當(dāng)它和免費(fèi)信息相關(guān)時(shí)，這么做可以對(duì)我們大家都有好處。
Free…With A Catch
免費(fèi)……得先付出。
The first conversation is from the SXSW keynote with Chris Andersen and Guy Kawasaki. The salient point that I want to bring out here is the contrast Chris made between 20th Century “free” and 21st Century “free”: 20th Century free wasn’t really free since there was always a catch. “Buy 1 get 1 free!”, “Sign up (and give us your information) and get something free!,” etc. We learned that if something were free, it either was worth what we paid for it or that it was used to get something else from us.
首先，我們來(lái)看看SXSW回應(yīng)Chris Andersen和Guy Kawasaki的對(duì)話。在這里我想提到的重要觀點(diǎn)是Chris把20世紀(jì)的“免費(fèi)”和21世紀(jì)的“免費(fèi)”作比較：20世紀(jì)的“免費(fèi)”并不是真的免費(fèi)，因?yàn)榭偸切枰雀冻鲆恍〇|西。“買一送一”，“注冊(cè)（給我們你的信息）有獎(jiǎng)！”等。我們于是知道所謂免費(fèi)的東西，不是指我們花的錢物有所值，就是可以給我們帶來(lái)其它東西。
In fairness, that free model was necessitated by the fact that it costed something to make something. But that economic model has changed. We can now offer information and services for costs so low that they’re effectively zero. When the cost to offer and deliver something valuable is effectively zero, there’s no reason why we have to charge, which means there’s no necessary connection between something being freely given away and the value of what’s given away.
等價(jià)交換是免費(fèi)的模式要滿足的必要條件，也就是花費(fèi)了A得到B。但是那種經(jīng)濟(jì)模式已經(jīng)被改變了。現(xiàn)在我們提供廉價(jià)信息和服務(wù)，成本是有效零。當(dāng)提供的有價(jià)物的成本為有效零的時(shí)候，也就順理成章的不用收費(fèi)了，也就是說(shuō)免費(fèi)的贈(zèng)品和贈(zèng)品的價(jià)值之間沒(méi)有必然的聯(lián)系。
In other words, 21st Century “free” can really mean free. Unfortunately, we don’t get how something can be free and valuable because we’re still stuck thinking in terms of 20th Century “free.”
換句話說(shuō)，21世紀(jì)的“免費(fèi)”可以是真的免費(fèi)。只是我們沒(méi)有弄明白為什么有價(jià)值的東西被免費(fèi)供應(yīng)，因?yàn)槲覀冞€停留在20世紀(jì)的“免費(fèi)”思維里。
YAY For Free! Can I Please Have Some Food Now?
免費(fèi)，太棒了！現(xiàn)在來(lái)點(diǎn)食物可以嗎？
The second conversation: Nick Cernis‘ post on the End of Free Content. Nick’s known to do awesome things, and rather than change the way we think about paper, he’s instead changing the way we think about economic exchange. The problem with free is that so many content producers (read: creative entrepreneurs) are trying to build a business by giving away their creative stuff. If you leave a brick-and-mortar store with some of their stuff without paying for it, it’s called stealing; if you leave a bloggers’ website with some of their stuff, it’s called many things, but stealing isn’t one of them. We expect to pay for stuff from stores; we don’t expect to pay for stuff from (most) websites.
第二段對(duì)話：來(lái)自Nick Cernis跟在免費(fèi)內(nèi)容最后發(fā)的帖子。Nick經(jīng)常會(huì)做一些讓人敬佩的事，也因此而小有名氣，與其改變我們對(duì)紙的看法，他選擇改變我們對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)交換的看法。免費(fèi)帶來(lái)的問(wèn)題是，許多網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容供應(yīng)商（閱讀：有創(chuàng)意的企業(yè)家）通過(guò)免費(fèi)提供創(chuàng)新的想法來(lái)做生意。離開(kāi)一家實(shí)體店，拿了東西不給錢叫偷東西；離開(kāi)某人的博客網(wǎng)站，記住了他們的內(nèi)容卻可以有很多種叫法，但你絕對(duì)不會(huì)用偷這個(gè)字眼。人們希望我們?cè)诘昀锿ㄟ^(guò)付費(fèi)來(lái)買東西，卻不敢奢望我們?yōu)g覽（大部分）網(wǎng)頁(yè)后支付相關(guān)的費(fèi)用。
Nick’s point is that the traditional way around this is to try to earn income from selling people stuff related to but distinct from the content being presented. There are a ton of different ways to do this, but most of them are predicated on giving away the content in order to sell something else. This makes about as much sense as Burger King giving you whoppers so that you’ll buy McDonald’s fries, in return for McDonald’s selling Burger King’s fries, and it’s equally as lopsided.
Nick的觀點(diǎn)是，傳統(tǒng)的經(jīng)商模式是通過(guò)給人賣東西來(lái)獲得回報(bào)，提供網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容有一樣的地方，卻又大不相同。做生意的方法很多，數(shù)不勝數(shù)，但是大多數(shù)的網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容供應(yīng)商都青睞于通過(guò)提供免費(fèi)內(nèi)容，來(lái)賣其它東西。這道理就像漢堡王只賣給你漢堡，你就會(huì)去麥當(dāng)勞買薯?xiàng)l，作為回報(bào)麥當(dāng)勞售賣的是漢堡王的薯?xiàng)l，所謂有所得必有所失。
Content producers recognize the problem at some stage or the other, but the problem is that they’re trying to win a game of profit by playing under the rules of free. At a certain point, content producers have to sell their content, but the common path is to go from free to $47 (or some other number that ends in seven) in no time flat.
網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容供應(yīng)商在發(fā)展的過(guò)程里意識(shí)到這個(gè)問(wèn)題，但是他們往往為了最終取得勝利而選擇剛開(kāi)始遵守潛規(guī)則。發(fā)展到一定程度，網(wǎng)絡(luò)供應(yīng)商會(huì)出售他們的內(nèi)容，一般的途徑是從免費(fèi)到47美元（或者結(jié)尾是7的其它數(shù)字），任何時(shí)間都一樣。
But why should it go from zero to $47, when it can go from zero to $4 just the same? Remember, there’s very little investment sunk into the creation of the content, so the primary justification for the price increase has to be made from the position of economic viability for the business. Surely, no business could survive charging so little for its valuable products? Except for Apple. And 37Signals. And Peepcode. And Leo. And Jonathan Coulton. And the myriad of membership sites mushrooming up as you read this.
那為什么要從0到$47,什么時(shí)候才可以是0到$4？記住，網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容的創(chuàng)意基本不需要什么投資，那么價(jià)格上漲首先必須考慮的就是生存之道。很顯然，沒(méi)有一門生意可以給你提供有價(jià)商品，卻只獲取微薄的回報(bào)而存活下來(lái)。除了為數(shù)不多的幾家公司：蘋果，37Signals，Peepcode，Leo和Jonathan Coulton。還有Myriad的會(huì)員網(wǎng)會(huì)像雨后春筍般的排到搜索引擎的前面，當(dāng)你讀到這篇文章的時(shí)候。
Additionally, there’s a general rule in pricing a product: the higher the price, the harder you’ll have to work to acquire a customer for that item. And therein lies a big hurdle for a lot of the content producers I know – we want to create stuff and make some money from what we do, but the whole selling process is not our particular cup of tea. It’s more like the thought of going to a creepy dentist.
另外，產(chǎn)品定價(jià)有個(gè)總的原則：價(jià)格越高，越難贏得顧客。據(jù)我所知，對(duì)于很多網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容供應(yīng)商來(lái)說(shuō)，需要克服的最大的困難就是——我們想通過(guò)自己創(chuàng)造的東西創(chuàng)造財(cái)富，但是售賣過(guò)程卻不是我們擅長(zhǎng)的。就像一想到要去看牙醫(yī)就讓你毛骨聳然一樣。
What’s beautiful about the idea of micropayments is that it’s a win-win for everybody. Content producers can make money from their creations, and the fact that they’ll be receiving money for said content encourages most honest folks to create content worth paying for. Consumers can get valuable stuff that meets their wants and needs without having to pay what essentially amounts to the inflated cost of products that account for people who are too frugal to pay $47 for something. And we can all skip the traditional overhyped sales/launch process…
小額支付的主意妙在它對(duì)于大家都有好處。網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容供應(yīng)商可以通過(guò)創(chuàng)造內(nèi)容賺錢，通過(guò)發(fā)布內(nèi)容就可以收到錢激勵(lì)了一大部分的忠實(shí)讀者創(chuàng)作值得付費(fèi)的內(nèi)容。消費(fèi)者可以得到有價(jià)值的東西，有她們想要的，也有她們需要的，最重要的是不需要支付因成本膨脹而暴漲的基本金額，而高居不下的成本都是因?yàn)橐恍┤颂^(guò)于節(jié)儉，以至于不愿意支付$47而造成的。最后的好處是大家都可以避免遭受傳統(tǒng)廣告的轟炸，跳過(guò)開(kāi)始步驟……
But wait, there’s more…
等等，還沒(méi)完呢
The Psychology of Exchange-Based Acquisition
心理學(xué)的交換基本訴求
The third leg of this post comes from a conversation Havi started about free stuff. She’s dealing with the fact that if you people free stuff, they won’t use it, but if you charge them something, even if it’s a ridiculously small amount, they’ll use it in a heartbeat.
本帖的第三樓是來(lái)自于Havi，她從談?wù)撁赓M(fèi)東西開(kāi)始的。她面臨的事實(shí)是如果給人們提供免費(fèi)的東西，大家都不用，但是如果你需要她們付費(fèi)，即使金額再怎么小，她們都會(huì)因?yàn)樾奶鄱褂盟?strong class="label bg2" jquery1318211606140="71">
As counter-intuitive as this sounds, think about it for second. I bet you’re frustrated that you haven’t used something you’ve purchased. It could be a book, an album, exercise equipment, that pair of shoes you know you’ll never wear – it doesn’t matter. Now contrast that to how you feel about the free stuff you’ve received; sure, you may recognize its value, but I bet you feel different about the fact that you haven’t used the free stuff. It doesn’t matter that the free item is “worth” the same amount as the one you’ve paid for – we weigh the things we’ve exchanged something we care about for (i.e., money) differently than the things we haven’t paid anything for.
我反對(duì)直覺(jué)，正如我不同意上面的看法一樣，因此想了又想。但是你肯定會(huì)覺(jué)到灰心喪氣，因?yàn)橘I了一些東西根本不去用，可能是書，相冊(cè)，健身器材，或者是一雙你知道永遠(yuǎn)都不會(huì)穿的鞋—是什么并不重要?，F(xiàn)在你把那種灰心的想法和收到免費(fèi)東西的想法相比較，你可能首當(dāng)其沖的會(huì)意識(shí)到它的價(jià)值，但是我肯定你對(duì)沒(méi)有用過(guò)這些免費(fèi)東西的感覺(jué)還是不一樣的。免費(fèi)的和買來(lái)的東西“值”同樣的價(jià)錢并不重要—用錢交換我們?cè)诤醯臇|西和分文不取得來(lái)的東西兩者的分量肯定是不同的。
And because we care about the things we’ve acquired through exchange, we’re more likely to use it and take it seriously, since we a) don’t get confused by “free” stuff (see above) and b) are generally more motivated by things we’ve lost (money) than the things we could potentially gain (i.e., free stuff). I’ve experienced this so many times through coaching that I know it to be true; if I contacted you out of the blue and said “hey, don’t check your email in the morning if you’re a morning person,” you might take me seriously, but if you contacted me and paid me to tell you the same thing, you’ll go at the idea like a spider-monkey. You’ve paid for such wisdom, after all.
同時(shí)因?yàn)槲覀冊(cè)诤踅粨Q得來(lái)的東西，我們更加愿意去使用它并珍惜它，這是因?yàn)锳）我們不會(huì)因?yàn)樗?#8220;免費(fèi)”而感到迷惑（參照上面的論述）；B）失去某些東西（例如花錢）而得到的東西比不勞而獲得來(lái)的東西一般更激勵(lì)人。我參加過(guò)很多次培訓(xùn)，有過(guò)很多次這樣的經(jīng)歷，我知道這是對(duì)的；如果我唐突的跟你聯(lián)系并說(shuō)：“你好，如果你是早起的人不要早上查郵件”你可能不太在意，但是如果你主動(dòng)聯(lián)系我，給我錢讓我告訴你同樣的話，效果肯定是不一樣的。畢竟這種智慧是你花錢買的。
So, while there’s a lot to be said about providing free stuff to people (karma, goodwill, altruism, etc.), it turns out that if you’re creating something that changes people behavior, the best way to actually get them to change their behavior is to charge them for the item in question. I assure you, you’ll get tons less praise for the awesomeness of the free “stuff,” but the people who buy your stuff will be more likely to take your stuff and do something with it rather than just add it to the pile of free stuff that’s already gathering dust (physical, mental, or digital).
所以當(dāng)人們提供免費(fèi)東西時(shí)可以說(shuō)很多話（命運(yùn)，表示友好，對(duì)誰(shuí)誰(shuí)有幫助等等），結(jié)論是如果你希望通過(guò)創(chuàng)造一些東西來(lái)改變?nèi)藗兊难孕?，不如讓他們?yōu)檫@些東西付費(fèi)而達(dá)到改變其言行舉止的最好效果。我保證提供免費(fèi)“東西”而得到的贊美會(huì)很少，但是至少買東西的人會(huì)使用它，而不是在落滿了灰塵的免費(fèi)贈(zèng)品堆里增加一份（身體的，智力的，或者是數(shù)字的）
Pulling It All Together
把所有的會(huì)話總結(jié)在一起
Let’s do some synthesis here. The word ‘free’ confuses us because we equate the cost of the item (to us) with the value of the item (to us). Content producers need to charge for some of their content so that they can put food on the table. Consumers benefit more when they pay for stuff because they actually use the stuff they buy. If content producers used micropayments as a model, less time would be spent on the marketing/promotion/sales process that could instead be spent on creating valuable products, so consumers would have greater access to the stuff they want and need.
總結(jié)一下。“免費(fèi)”這個(gè)詞讓我們迷惑不解，因?yàn)槲覀儼堰@個(gè)東西的成本（給我們的）等同于它的價(jià)值。網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容供應(yīng)商提供的有些內(nèi)容需要付費(fèi)，這樣他們才可以把食物放在桌子上。消費(fèi)者支付費(fèi)用獲得物品的時(shí)候受益更大，因?yàn)樗麄兪褂米约嘿?gòu)買的東西。如果網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容供應(yīng)商采用小金額的支付方式，花在市場(chǎng)推廣及銷售上的費(fèi)用就會(huì)減少，這些費(fèi)用可用于創(chuàng)造有價(jià)值的產(chǎn)品，消費(fèi)者可以使用更多他們想要和需要的東西。
And maybe – just maybe – we’d somehow move beyond thinking that free stuff isn’t valuable and we would actually sit up and pay attention to value rather than cost. The best things in life are free, after all.
也許—只是也許—我們會(huì)想想免費(fèi)的東西并沒(méi)有價(jià)值，我們會(huì)坐下來(lái)關(guān)注價(jià)值而不是成本。畢竟生活中最好的東西都是免費(fèi)的。
聯(lián)系客服
