Ideas, like mediocre explanations, are indeed cheap. But good explanations are much more rare (and presumably more valuable for it). Another frame is the frequently cited distance between ideas and and implementation. Ideas are cheap because they lay dormant, where the actual chain of cause-and-effect in the implementation of the idea is the manifestation of the explanation. The verdict on its success, the good, is only realized through its corresponding explanation.

Is this distinction between ideas and explanations one you support?