JTUK Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='RockfordStone' timestamp='1396879706' post='2418275'] I never saw what the issue is with venues not paying bands, if you aren't getting paid, and want to be paid, don't play the gig, its that simple surely?. it's different If you are a career musician, or make your earnings by playing, in which case you wouldn't play a venue that isn't paying anyway would you?. For a lot of us on here, music is a hobby, and the cost of gear/travel etc is part of that in the same way that any other hobby would be. If I took up archery, I'd have to pay for the bow, the arrows, the transport etc, but wouldn't expect to rock up to an event and be paid for it.. why should music be different? or am I missing something completely [/quote] But if you got to such a standard whereby other archers got paid... would you not be wanting to be paid yourself ..? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icastle Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='RockfordStone' timestamp='1396879706' post='2418275'] If I took up archery, I'd have to pay for the bow, the arrows, the transport etc, but wouldn't expect to rock up to an event and be paid for it.. why should music be different? or am I missing something completely [/quote] The main difference is that your investment in time and equipment is being used to provide a free profit. It's a little bit like you lending me your car in the evenings so I can use it as a taxi and me returning it every morning with an empty tank and never giving you any money for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad3353 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1396880690' post='2418292'] But if you got to such a standard whereby other archers got paid... would you not be wanting to be paid yourself ..? [/quote] The simple reply is 'No'. I'm not interested in comparing my earning ability with others, i whatever field, and I don't look over my shoulder to see how I'm dong vis-à-vis others. Most especially if I was an archer; I'd be more interested in hitting the target as best I can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTUK Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='icastle' timestamp='1396879736' post='2418276'] I have a standard 'test' I apply before agreeing to play for nothing. If everyone else involved (i.e. bar staff, PA provider) is getting paid then I expect the same professional courtesy as everyone else involved. [/quote] I know we have laboured the point..or I have... but free gigs don't concern me so much as we just don't get involved in them.... but that is not to say there are no repercussions of sorts. We do a few festivals this year...and they are nice gigs to do, IMO...but they are paid... Now, a pub festival puts charity in the title somewhere... hires in a stage and P.A and the whole line-up does it for free.. That is where the lines tend to be crossed in my opinion...as we even have 'agents' running these bills... Now...is that not just a little bit crass and obvious? I know a few ( agents ) who run marquees and P.A as well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTUK Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1396881048' post='2418304'] The simple reply is 'No'. I'm not interested in comparing my earning ability with others, i whatever field, and I don't look over my shoulder to see how I'm dong vis-à-vis others. Most especially if I was an archer; I'd be more interested in hitting the target as best I can. [/quote] we know you are just weird... but in all seriousness, you never charge, I get that. Personally, I'd have to really know an act that didn't charge, to book them as I would be thinking what is wrong with them but accept your stance is likely to be the exception... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad3353 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='icastle' timestamp='1396880969' post='2418300'] The main difference is that your investment in time and equipment is being used to provide a free profit. It's a little bit like you lending me your car in the evenings so I can use it as a taxi and me returning it every morning with an empty tank and never giving you any money for it. [/quote] A bit tenuous. I have often lent some of my gear to another musician; if he/she can get paid for doing their gig, then fine. wouldn't necessarily charge for that. I once lent a Cort active fiver to Rodney 'Skeet' Curtis at a Macao Parker festival (his Lakland was broke...). Did I charge him for the loan..? No. Was he paid for playing..? Certainly. Things are not always black and white, and our motivations can be far from similar. Why can that not be acceptable to some..? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockfordStone Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) [quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1396880690' post='2418292'] But if you got to such a standard whereby other archers got paid... would you not be wanting to be paid yourself ..? [/quote]if I got to such standard, and I was asking to be paid then it wouldn't be a hobby anymore, it would be a job. That's my point, if I was doing music as a career, then id only do paid gigs, so venues that don't pay bands wouldbt be on my radar. As a hobby musician like a lot of us here, I care not how much the venue makes, just as I wouldn't care how much the burger van took if I went to an archery competition this weekend. my point is simple... if you are doing a gig for financial gain, don't take the unpaid gigs and don't worry about it, there are plenty of bands who are happy to play for free Edited April 7, 2014 by RockfordStone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad3353 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) [quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1396881319' post='2418309'] we know you are just weird... but in all seriousness, you never charge, I get that. Personally, I'd have to really know an act that didn't charge, to book them as I would be thinking what is wrong with them but accept your stance is likely to be the exception... [/quote] I thank you for the generosity (not so sure about the compliment..! ), but can assure you that we have several venues in our vicinity that ask us along, in full knowledge of what we perform and how. We, too, are 'picky' about the dates we'll accept, and not looking for a fee, can be as unattached as we wish. We play for our own and the audiences' pleasure, and those that invite us ask us back. While I respect the attitude of professional musicians (I was one for about a decade...), I also respect those that have entirely different motivations. There is no question of 'quality' involved; I've seen (and, unfortunately, played in...) many professional formations whose performance was really quite mediocre. I've also seen (and played in...) many groups or bands, completely amateur, able to hold a candle to the best. The financial motivation or arrangements are not, ime, so tightly bonded as one would think reading this thread. Charging to play..? Fine, no problem. Playing for a hobby..? Jolly good, and best of luck. Sharing the same bill..? So much the better. It's not (to me...) a competition. Everyone wins, except that grumpy ol' git in the corner, but then again, he's never satisfied, is he..? Edited April 7, 2014 by Dad3353 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CamdenRob Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 A venue is there to make money... To them, your music is a product that brings more people into their venue. If your product is generic (your band plays the same stuff as everyone else at the same standard) then a venue will not pay you as they can get the same effect (more people through the door) by getting a band in that will pay for free. If your music is unique (other bands / musicians cannot offer a comparable product) and a venues clientele only turns out for the music that you are providing then they will have to pay you... and they will as it's in their financial interests to do so. Those complaining about not getting paid, how unique is what you are doing? Could you be replaced by another local band and the audience wouldn't even notice? Getting paid for music is like getting paid for anything else. You have to offer something the competition doesn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTUK Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 I have already said it is a job... a few pages back. It doesn't have to be my main income or even that regular but if I play, I ask for payment. It doesn't really matter to me if people don't get paid...UNTIL that little exercise encroaches, as it surely does ( as per some examples I cite above) on the paid gig territory. Look at any regional gig diary this summer... to see how many 'free' festivals there are. Everyone can cite a really pertinent and just cause but you could spend all summer doing free bookings. Looking at the line-ups, I am sure some bands do. Most 'working' bands I know will entertain 3 free gigs for charity but there are so many that it is hard to sort thru the genuine ones. As for us.... we don't do them..or if it was really something we would want to do, we would still pay ourselves minimum fees anyway. Other than that... in an ideal world, I'd like bands to know their value in the real world and charge for it. But some either can't or don't.. oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTUK Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='CamdenRob' timestamp='1396882583' post='2418335'] A venue is there to make money... To them, your music is a product that brings more people into their venue. If your product is generic (your band plays the same stuff as everyone else at the same standard) then a venue will not pay you as they can get the same effect (more people through the door) by getting a band in that will pay for free. If your music is unique (other bands / musicians cannot offer a comparable product) and a venues clientele only turns out for the music that you are providing then they will have to pay you... and they will as it's in their financial interests to do so. Those complaining about not getting paid, how unique is what you are doing? Could you be replaced by another local band and the audience wouldn't even notice? Getting paid for music is like getting paid for anything else. You have to offer something the competition doesn't. [/quote] As far as I am concerned we don't play venues that don't pay... I am just saying that it doesn't help if others do.. So then, yes, I think the venue has a dodgy operation if they want free bands and they are taking advantage of certain people. They wouldn't dream to ask their bar staff to do it for free...even on those charity gigs..? so I just don't see why their 'model' is acceptable for bands..even inexperienced or poor ones. But they do.... er...why is that? Other things I would do...btw.. is make the music license have proper teeth and instead of diluting it like they have done, make if far harder..read expensive... for pubs to put on music nights, and not have the free for all they have at the moment. £250 a band in a pub is very poor money and the fees have stagnated.for years. but that is another thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CamdenRob Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1396883557' post='2418352'] As far as I am concerned we don't play venues that don't pay... I am just saying that it doesn't help if others do.. [/quote] If you are getting paid for your gigs then your band is obviously offering something that the free bands aren't... If the venues your playing could get what you provide for free then they would... but they can't so they pay you guys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTUK Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 yes.... but also, the venue would have no credence at all... and people wouldn't go there in the first place so it would be very hard for the venue to establish a going concern. IME. I must admit I find the 'appeal' thing of bands quite a subject in itself.. How much they charge ..?? on what criteria, etc etc .. The end result is down to how many beers they sell... we all know that.. but the whole charging thing is quite arbitary... where you have 3 piece bands doing the bare minimum and asking for £300. They might have lights ..of a fashion.. but the P.A is adequate as vox are an afterthought... so sometimes, I'll agree, what you get paid is about how cheeky you are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icastle Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1396881048' post='2418304'] The simple reply is 'No'. I'm not interested in comparing my earning ability with others, i whatever field, and I don't look over my shoulder to see how I'm dong vis-à-vis others. [/quote] I don't have any interest in that either, never have been and never will be. Although music isn't my sole income, it does provide me with an income of sorts and I protect that by ensuring I get paid. [quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1396881048' post='2418304'] Most especially if I was an archer; I'd be more interested in hitting the target as best I can. [/quote] I'd be more interested in running away from you very very quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad3353 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='icastle' timestamp='1396885490' post='2418383']...I'd be more interested in running away from you very very quickly. [/quote] You shouldn't ought'o have bought them there bull's eyes..! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Rotten Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) [quote name='Subbeh' timestamp='1396835157' post='2417830'] Thing is not everyone can live on good will, sometimes we need to pay for mortgages, food, petrol and any number of other things. Of course good will and charity have their place but the ad in the OP is clearly relying on someone else's talent given freely in order to make more money for someone who almost certainly isn't in need or passing the goodwill around. I'm sure that everyone of us have given either time, money or both for charity or those genuinely in need, you seem to acting obtusely for the sake of it. [/quote] [url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-S10LdUEfA&feature=player_detailpage"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-S10LdUEfA&feature=player_detailpage[/url] Edited April 7, 2014 by Jonnyboy Rotten Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyfisher Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Perhaps we're overlooking the fact that the rewards of playing live can be more than money. Clearly, for some bands the only acceptable reward IS money (which is fine) but for others it is clearly not an important consideration. So, assuming no one is being forced to play gigs against their will, it seems reasonable that the opportunity to play live with other musicians in front of an audience is reward enough for some bands. Horses for courses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad3353 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 [quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1396886694' post='2418405'] Perhaps we're overlooking the fact that the rewards of playing live can be more than money. Clearly, for some bands the only acceptable reward IS money (which is fine) but for others it is clearly not an important consideration. So, assuming no one is being forced to play gigs against their will, it seems reasonable that the opportunity to play live with other musicians in front of an audience is reward enough for some bands. Horses for courses. [/quote] ...and this, whether or not others are profiting from the performance. It's all good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTUK Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 well... do those venues that don't tend to pay...do they give bands a choice? If they do, then fair enough, more fool the bands that do that...if they don't because they don't want to..or rather, they get takers ... then in a sense they are being 'forced' to ...because the band feels it has no choice but to play the 'accepted' game... This London circuit that I knew, operated like that. You had to play certain places to even stand a chance of getting A&R there and venues took the advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spinynorman Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 [quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1396891247' post='2418463'] well... do those venues that don't tend to pay...do they give bands a choice? If they do, then fair enough, more fool the bands that do that...if they don't because they don't want to..or rather, they get takers ... then in a sense they are being 'forced' to ...because the band feels it has no choice but to play the 'accepted' game... This London circuit that I knew, operated like that. You had to play certain places to even stand a chance of getting A&R there and venues took the advantage. [/quote] In that case, though, isn't getting A&R there a benefit to the band, which might outweigh getting paid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 (edited) Whether right or wrong, the impetus behind the issue is clear-cut. The hospitality business (pubs, bars, restaurants) may appear to be highly profitable, yet it is not. Let's take pubs. The sector has been kept afloat for years not by landlords' beer profits but by the rents charged to the landlords by the chains. There was, until recently, a queue of hopefuls who fancied the idea of their own little pub. Once installed, they found themselves in thrall to the brewers. They'd lose their money and a new [s]sucker[/s] 'hopeful' would move in. Against this backdrop it is no surprise that landlords will seek to reduce their costs by hiring free bands. The alternative is to pay a band and pray they cover their costs. The statistics vary wildly but I've seen profit per pint quoted as being between 12p and £1.10. Even at the higher figure a landlord will have to sell an extra 200 or so pints to cover the band. That's around 50 people at 4 pints each or about 66 people at 3 pints each - just to break even. Now there may be local bands who can regularly pull 66 punters whenever they play. But can they guarantee it? If not, the landlord loses money. The way I see it, any landlord who agrees to pay a band is taking a chance on the band's pulling power. This is why so many pub guv'nors ask first-timers 'Do you have a following?' Most hobby bands don't, so why should the landlord volunteer to lose money? The reality is that there are few local bands who can assuredly draw enough punters to cover a landlord's costs. Those who cannot should agree to play for free until they have built a following sufficient that they can point to a full bar and ask for their due. Too many of us delude ourselves that we are semi-pros when in truth we are amateurs - that is - 'someone who does something for free because they like it'. At root, most of us are far more interested in playing in front of an audience than we are in delivering that audience. Why this insistence on getting paid if we neglect the business side of things? When the landlord's objective is to increase pub traffic then I see no problem in a landlord paying one band because he knows they can pull while denying remuneration to another because they are an unknown quantity or known to be unprofitable. As for having background music - harpist, cocktail piano, gloomy minstrel - that's a different thing altogether. Edited April 8, 2014 by skankdelvar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretmeister Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 Silverstone announced today that they want volunteers to roam and play music at the Grand Prix. https://twitter.com/SilverstoneUK/status/453460907839201280 Multi-billion Dollar industry taking the piss again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyfisher Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 It looks like the deal is free tickets . . . . . so probably a better deal than £50 each for playing the Dog & Duck - if you're an F1 fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fretmeister Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 £120 for a ticket. Arrive at 5am. Don't get out until late. If I did an entire day roaming magic (which I do sometimes) I'd be wanting £800 at the very least for a 12 hour shift. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 (edited) In fairness, Silverstone Circuits Ltd is a loss-making business currently owned by the British Racing Drivers Club, itself a not-for-profit membership association. Silverstone is not part of Mr Ecclestone's Formula 1 organisation with whom it has until recently enjoyed an adversarial relationship. Far from being a rich player, Silverstone is pretty much on its uppers and- rather like the impecunious pub landlord - will seek to cover its costs in any way possible. In the last couple of years Silverstone and the BRDC have attempted to cover the circuit's enormous debts by selling certain parcels of land for commercial usage. The BRDC is now alleged to be in discussions with an un-named party to sell the track; the purpose of the sale is presumably to reduce the financial drag on the BRDC's other activities which include race driver educational programmes. In any event, the situation is the same as might pertain elsewhere. If one does not wish to play for free, one may politely reject the invitation. Edited April 8, 2014 by skankdelvar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.