Al Krow

Yeah, that's fair / all makes sense. But some decisions e.g. to close a plant in Luton and move the work to the EU would be less likely to happen now. So, at the margin, it will make the UK a relatively more attractive place to set up shop.

So if you're making stuff in the EU and exporting to the US and facing 20% US tariffs, then you could instead: (i) make stuff in the US (with import duties on raw materials and parts); or (ii) make it in the UK with lower labour costs than the US. I suspect a lot of EU company boards tomorrow morning are going to be having emergency meetings and some of them will be thinking the exact same thing. If so, these Trump tariffs could prove to be an unexpected gift and the 10% differential could provide quite a boost to the UK, particularly on things we're already good at e.g. pharmaceuticals. In addition the UK govt is currently looking to negotiate a trade deal with the US that could lower tariffs further. Getting the the EU 27 to agree a trade deal with the US won't be quick, although 20% tariffs are going to focus a lot of minds I suspect! Pity the US consumer who is going to be picking up a big chunk of the tab for all of this. Everyone's going to be watching to see if Trump gets caned in the mid-term elections and becomes a lame duck?

Just picking up on your excellent post on the "distortion that keeps the 'thump'" post: I'll need to give your recommended X-bass distortion a try out! I've been using the AIRD Preamp Orange stack which gives a very juicy fuzz that I'm liking a lot. As we were discussing, so much more weight to it with a clean blend parallel path, and with the EQ in the +125Hz bass/low mids given a boost on both paths, combined with using a comp as a sustain on the fuzz path but something much more standard on the clean blend path.

I think that's what's called an "open mic night" 😅

Our guitarist heard the exact same from a pro jazz drummer he knows, and I thought at the time there's much wisdom in that! Wonder who came up with that little gem originally?

Sure. The OP excluded function bands in his original query. The "grey" area where both amateur and semi-pro bands play is typically pubs - no DJs need be worn and, in my experience, considerably less grief than function work! But I'm guessing you and I would still want to be paid for doing pub gigs? I'm totally fine with that in my case - means I get to work with semi-pro musos, for whom the money is important, and which has been a privilege for me and helped me improve as a bass player.

Think that would work well for a tribute and originals band. Not sure whether punters would want pay extra for a "standard" covers band, though, unless there wasn't too much competition locally? Potentially mean playing to smaller audiences than if the venue is picking up the tab?

Oooh that's a really interesting perspective. But I'm not sure it has to be that way and I wonder if it's as much related to the time and effort involved as it is to the money? Fact is, for most musicians making a living from their music can be incredibly demanding - it definitely becomes work. But if you're good enough to make enough money to live off of your passion, whilst not feeling that it is a chore i.e. you really enjoy your work, does it taint your relationship with it or just make you grateful that you're one of the lucky few who's passion is also their job?

I've been thinking, though, that a number of our/my comments have been looking at this from a semi-pro musicians perspective where payment is the norm. @Beedster was asking about this from a talented hobbyist / amateur perspective and not sure that our (certainly my) comments have properly reflected that? So steering my comment back to the talented hobbyist: an amateur orchestra member playing covers of classical music (by Beethoven et al!) would not expect to be paid. They do it purely for the joy/passion of making music.

Pretty much ALL classical music is covers! No one disparages professional orchestras for their musical talent.

Thanks Steve, that makes sense. I guess I was going on a Tim Weatherspoon's comment (Jan 2023) that: "the biggest threat to the hospitality industry is the vast disparity in tax treatment between pubs and restaurants and supermarkets. Supermarkets pay zero VAT on food sales, whereas pubs/restaurants pay 20%. This tax benefit allows supermarkets to subsidise the selling price of beer" Is the above still correct in terms of VAT on food?

Competition with supermarkets is a major factor also, right? Don't understand the thinking that says that the supermarkets get a relative subsidy on beverage sales in the form of lower VAT/duties compared to pubs? If someone can please explain the reasoning on that one - seems pretty misguided to me?

Nicely put

It depends on the venue? Eg if 100+ punters stay an hour longer and each buy 1 or 2 pints, which certainly can be the case in several of the venues I know, the sums do add up pretty quickly. Which is why they have live bands on 2 nights a week often followed by a DJ and many such venues are doing very well. They know what they need to be doing to be a destination pub. Totally appreciate that's not going to be true for all venues.

Not necessarily. A decent band, even without a following, can keep punters on site. A number of venues get their bands to start and finish later - ideally as close to closing time as possible, because they know the venue starts emptying pretty rapidly when the live music finishes. A pub makes a very decent [typically around 70%] gross margin on wet sales, and they can easily figure out whether it's worth their while putting on live music, or whether they're better off with a DJ or no music other than the JukeBox or their own playlists.