I think we need to distinguish between a scam and a bad deal.

It would be a scam if it's deceptive, i.e., the organizer has no intention of accepting any auditioners other than her friends, or if the money she says is going for CD production is actually going into her pocket.

A bad deal, on the other hand, is when what is get isn't worth what you pay, although it is all over the table and what you get is what you were told you would get. And a bad deal according to one person's values might be a good deal according to another's.

In this instance (and M.Ted, Willie-o was talking about the open mike TV show I described in the first post, not sc's description of Newfolk festivals), what you get for your $20 is the possibility of a slot on a small-time cable show and the possibility that you might end up subsidizing other people's participation instead. I think this is a bad deal, and I suspect that many of you will agree with me; but if somebody just really wants to be on TV, then it might be a good deal for them. But I wouldn't call it a scam, if everyone knows what the deal is going in and the organizer isn't pocketing money she said she'd spend on the project.

Actually Willie-o's posts have brought up a twinge of guilt for me, because I also know the organizer, and I never suspected her of dishonest motives, nor did I mean to make her a target - even anonymously - for accusations of dishonesty. I only mentioned this specific project because it was what got me thinking - what I wanted to talk about what the principle of paying for an audition in general.

You're right, Gary T, that most people are objecting in principle to the idea of having to pay just to audition for something. So what about my example of paying to apply to a university music program? Is there anyone who thinks that this scenario is exploitative or a scam? If not, what's the difference? Don Firth says it's a very different situation, but I don't see why; it's still a case of having to pay just to be considered for a spot.

Marion