Performers fees (% or flat fee?)

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 03:19 PM

Fair play to you - you're playing the game, and more people in the grass roots of folk need to become more switched on to such opportunities, IMHO. Most of them wouldn't want to, I reckon: the aforementioned criteria, stipulations and evaluations required would be alienating to many people.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Linda Kelly
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 02:43 PM

see also
musicians in residence

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: GUEST,ian
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 02:33 PM

Back to original thread,i am not sure a lot of the so called best acts in folk are THE BEST.Folk has always been littered,like most other styles,with a lot of of self importance.The elite should still play the large and small places alike.As posted earlier,a lot of the gigs are attended by elderly people,They have seen a lot more of the folk scene through the years than many of us.Working on a basis of playing the gig to get a return booking is a sign of how good the so called Best are.I hope the organisers stick to a policy and get their heads together nationally to benifit artists and listeners.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 02:28 PM

for many years I ran a folk club in Bury St Edmunds,Imanaged to get funding from eastern arts,which enabled me to book Maccoll /sEEGER
Carthy/Swarbrick., Cyril Tawney and many others.
Countess, I have never failed miserably at anything.,apart from physics.
since your a concertina player well have to play a few tunes sometime,keep squeezing.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 02:18 PM

Quite easy really, Ruth. We run both a weekly folk club and an annual folk festival. The local council has supported both with direct funding. North West Arts as was (now given the unfortunate name 'Arts About North West by some wag at a marketing company!) have given us funding for the folk festival. As we use lots of the folk festival artists at the club as well it is possible by clever dealing with the artists concerened to subsidise folk club artists with festival funding from the Arts council.

The best we have ever done was around 5 years ago when we received around £2000, enabling us to book, amongst others, an African Storyteller and Ukrainian dancers as part of the festival as well as getting 'deals' from major artists to do both the festival and the club. Even outside that we have been given the opportunity to apply for funding for the weekly club as part of a small club incentive some time ago. It was aimed mainly at Jazz clubs but was equaly applicable to any music club with small audiences. We did not apply in this instance because we were advised we would have a better chance of receiving our regular festival grant.

It is very important to understand that you need to apply for something that you cannot normaly achieve without funding AND that the funding is being used for the benefit of both the local community and the art form concerned. Hope this helps and if you need any further help or advice please feel free to PM me.

Cheers

D.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 01:37 PM

"I have actualy, Ruth. We have had funding from both North West Arts and the local council."

you're telling me the Arts Council subsidises your folk club? I'm genuinely intrigued. Do tell us more.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Jim Lad
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 11:18 AM

Arts Council? Good grief. It's my business. If I can't make enough from Folk Venues then I have to find other ways. That's why I play Pubs & Clubs. Not interested at all in Government handouts and besides; the money goes to those who know how to shuffle papers and few of them are actually performers. From what I've seen so far, the paper shufflers and promo experts should, in many cases, have spent more time honing their skills. Do that and the business will take care of itself.
The ones who lose are the folk venues who cannot come up with the funds and the performers who would love to play for them but cannot accommodate the lower paying venues.
I'll play for folk clubs when I can but I have to make a living.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Scrump
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 11:18 AM

f*lkie luninaries

A Freudian typo? :-)

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 11:02 AM

Not sure what you mean, countess. Is it that every folkie who applied failed or that the only failed applications were from folkies?

D.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 10:24 AM

Someone I know used to evaluate community arts applications for ACE funding. He designed forms which were simple to understand and gave as much help as possible (short of actually completing them for the applicants) on how to compile a budget and list priority aims, objectives and indicators. Guess which ones failed miserably every time to meet criteria and displayed not a scrap of understanding of how to cost, or recognition of who the project was aimed at, why it merited funding from the public purse, how it would benefit the community or how it might eventually become self-financing? Yeah, right, the local f*lkie luninaries.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 10:16 AM

I have actualy, Ruth. We have had funding from both North West Arts and the local council.

So, no, I'm not kidding. If I can do it anyone can!

:D

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 09:57 AM

"What would be wrong with the Arts council, or another such body, funding smaller clubs so they can pay the nationals a decent rate and still charge the poorer members of the audience an afordable fee?"

you gotta be kidding...have you any idea the sorts of terms and conditions that come with subsidy and funding? They'd want to know how your marketing was going to be carried out, how the club was going to actively try and attract new members, who those members were and whether they represented an appropriate social and cultural mix, how the subsidy represented value for money, what sorts of performance indicators you were going to use to evaluate the success or failure of the venture...the list goes on.

there are club promoters here who have said they don't even think that promoting their own gigs is their job! ACE would laugh them out of the room...

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 09:22 AM

Is it not possible to have a £2.50 floor singer/local artist club AND a £10 national artist venue? Why do I get the impresion that some people seem to be reacting as if the two are mutualy exclusive?

What should happen, and sometimes does in my experience, is that the two should be symbiotic. The small local club books the little known artist for a reasonable fee (We always pay 100% of the door takings and, more often than not, any profits from a raffle btw) When the artist becomes better known and/or professional they get the booking at the big expnsive venues. Conversely when the artist, now of national status, visits the big venue, they can, occasionaly, call in to the local club where they made their name and give a little of their time to helping the new comers to the scene by supporting the local club. Am I making any sense?

Having said all that the 'folk club scene' (whatever that may be!) is not all about artists or organisers. It should be primarily about the audience. In this market led economy what should be paid to the artists is dictated by what the audience wants to see and is willing to pay isn't it?

Now, if we want to open up a whole new can of worms, what about subsidies? What would be wrong with the Arts council, or another such body, funding smaller clubs so they can pay the nationals a decent rate and still charge the poorer members of the audience an afordable fee? You never know - we may even encourage pubs to go back to live entertainment for free if we expanded that. As long as it wasn't karaoke it would get my vote anyway...:-)

Incidentaly - we do usualy pay the % I mentioned earlier but when excess funds from singers nights or fund raisers get to a reasonable level we will always consider booking someone famous and subsidising their fee with club funds, ensuring that the club is completely non-profit making.

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Rasener
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 07:27 AM

I think an organiser should know their market and how to promote the club, first and foremost.
If you are paying a lot of money, then its in the organisers interests to promote.
Just what is the point of running a music venue, putting all the hard work in, if you sit back and don't promote like hell.

My methods of publicising are

Web sites
Forums
Local Newspapers
Local Radio
Posters
Diaries that are updated regularly so people can take away with them and even pass some on to other people.
Performers appearing on a particular night having it on their own websites.

All of the above doesn't guarantee people turning up, but I do know over time, that all of the methods above have brought additional people in.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 07:16 AM

Oggie's right. Having left a profit at almost all my gigs on the % basis I have happily subsidised less well known guests. I get angry though when I hear an organiser tell me that some other act has come to the club promising to do all the mail shot work to their extensive list etc only for them to turn up having done nothing because the fee is fixed and playing to a handful of people before taking all the profit I left the week or month before. And believe me it has happened a few times. Interestingly it appears to be the younger bands or artists who do this.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: oggie
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 06:00 AM

Concerning Guest's post of 05.17AM. Was a time when it was the other way round. A club I was involved with survived because the profit we made on the Carthys and Garbutts (at the fee they asked for and which was agreed and when we could get them) allowed us to book (again at the asked fee) less popular guests on whom we often made a small loss first time round.

Personal opinion is that if a "big name" can't cover their fee then either they are wrong for the club or the club is wrong for them and Either way they shouldn't be booked there. Using a big name as a loss leader, paid for by less well paid guests I certainly think shouldn't happen, affording through raffles and singers' nights is, of course, a different issue but even there I'm not sure.

All the best

Steve Ogden

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: GUEST, Tourer
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 05:50 AM

Organisers have suggested above that performers are happy if they get their rate. But bear in mind that we've been trained to expect not much. That doesn't mean we're happy about it. Resigned, maybe. We're often told what clubs feel they can afford, so we set our prices to suit. But what the club can afford is based on what they've trained their audience to pay, which may be as little a £2. I know some excellent, well-attended membership-type clubs, in less well off areas, where people happily pay £6-8, week in, week out. So it can be done - but maybe it's too late for those low door price places, because a hike would kill them off. Another funny thing: The more people have paid on the door, the more responsive they are - and that's pretty much a constant - probably because they want a return on their investment and so put more of themselves into the evening. And the more fun they have, the more CDs they buy. (I sell more CDs at expensive clubs than at cheap ones).

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 05:17 AM

just a thought, I was a pro, now a semi-pro(due to finances) singer I have been on local and national radio and regional tv in several areas. All to do with singing I hasten to add, however as I am not a "Big Name" I have organisers contact me and ask me to travel (one time) over two hundred miles to perform at their club and they say £75 is the going rate. I'll let you do the maths (Travelling alone 3hrs there 3hrs back). If they said a guaranteed £75 against a percentage of the door it could add up to something worth travelling for. I would like to point out that most organisers do a "Professional" job even though they may be "Amateurs"
and it has been my pleasure to make friends with many of the organisers I have come into contact with

As a footnote: you can imagine the dismay when you have performed at a club for less than £100 pounds because it's the going rate, the audience X door price easily amounted to much more. and then the next guest night they have a "Big Name" who certainly don't do it for less than £100 and you know that the club has made a loss on them. Is this a type of subsidy.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 03:01 AM

Yep, Well-WORN...

Write Only, Read Never...

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Jim Lad
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 09:51 PM

Sorry Foolestroupe: Was a bit scary in here, earlier. Can't really blame anyone for stepping over that stuff!

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 08:24 PM

"too many people are ignoring whats already been said ! "


Ah, another "Write Only" thread!

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 07:10 PM

Decent press releases always get used.

How do you think I got on Feedback talking about TWH?

Radio Sheffield talking about the Licensing Act?

Yorkshire TV talking about the Sheffield Giants?

Etc...etc...etc........And yes I am a media tart......

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: GUEST, foke bloke
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 06:48 PM

I've been waiting ten years for this this debate.

Tried to get it started a few times on mudcat and failed.

At last we may be getting somewhere!

Door prices, door prices door prices!! Am I gettng thorugh?

Too many organisers have inherited a great club, from a good fixer (who retired), and have been too afraid of loosing the gang to notice the price of fish.

Or fuel

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Dreadnought
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 06:43 PM

We've tried getting stuff in the local rag without much success. But to be honest I'm not sure many actually people look in the local paper for gigs - not in London at any rate.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Leadfingers
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 06:24 PM

I know of one club local to me that USED to get press releases in the local papers - But they had one of the local rag Journalists as a regular singer ! I wish I had a shilling in the bank for every bit of nice legible print ready paper I sent to MY three local rags and never got a print !! Its VERY easy to say 'Do This , Do That' but when you are presupposing a sensible response from external people it does change things ! The Five Years I was booking Uxbridge , I dont think we EVER only paid out the minimum , and a lot of artists shifted a lot of product as well !

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Rasener
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 06:04 PM

and Rangers, who I used to watch when I lived in Scotland :-)

Blimey Bernard I didn't realise I had posted the 200th post. Never done that before.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Jim Lad
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 05:54 PM

Ah! So you've heard of Celtic then.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Bernard
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 05:43 PM

Les - you made 100 and 200... tain't fair!!

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Rasener
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 05:39 PM

>>although not with regards to football<<

he he can't blame you there Jim

Les

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Jim Lad
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 05:24 PM

Well finally! A discussion broke out right in the middle of a fight.

Ex semi-pro hit the nail right on the head, I'm afraid. I have been a friend of folk societies for so long and have always been fond of the fact that their prices are so "Reasonable" that it never really occurred to me that the price should be upped!
My philosophy: You, the organizers put the bums in the seats and I'll entertain them. Promotion is not what I do. I am very easy to negotiate with and also know how to step out of the negotiations, without hurting any one's feelings.
I give as much of a break as I can afford and know that anything extra goes in the can for a bigger name.
But wait a minute! Why have we been keeping the price down for so many years and (as I think Scrump suggested) hurting the performers in the process? Why are folk audiences so reluctant to spend? I've seen more than the odd tea bag or flask of whisky snuck into the folk venues, over the years.
Are we not just telling ourselves that we're not worth all that much?
If you as a "Folk Venue" find yourself operating a floundering business, I'll accommodate you to the best of my ability and think no less of you. I've played for less than twenty people (more times than I care to admit) and had a grand time doing it but if someone wants me to do the promoting... sorry, It's your venue. If you don't have the patrons then you really don't have a venue. That's just a sad reality.
If you still really think that it is incumbent upon the performer to provide the audience then I would have to go with The Villan's advice: (although not with regards to football)....
"Maybe the best bet, is if a performer knows they are good enough, that they hire the venue and do the publicity and take all the profit."
Bernard: Thank you for the e-mail. You will find me easily enough on the SHAMELESS PROMOTION thread.
Kind Regards to All
Hoping for a meaningful discussion
Jim

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Bernard
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 04:40 PM

Yes, Leadfingers... just what I keep saying! The percentage agreement is a bonus, not a way of screwing the price down.

As for MU rates... I'm not so sure some of the 'big names' would be happy with that.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Leadfingers
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 04:26 PM

I notice (Just for a change) that too many people are ignoring whats already been said ! No Body seems to be in favour of a simple percentage of the door , and a lot of people are not sure about the flat fee , whereas , even posters claiming to be Pros (as in Guest02.56 are quite happy with the Guaranteed fee / Percentage that I always used . At least that way the Artist knows what they are walking away with if its a crap turnout .

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 04:13 PM

But we'd be staying at Grey Gables (or B&B at The Bull). And as Ruth & Dave are running it, all musicians (with the possible exception of the Tommy Croker Band) would be on MU rates . . . which brings it right back on topic. Phew.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Surreysinger
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 04:07 PM

Doesn't sound like the sort of festival that would attract me Countess !! Greenfield - no way - I like my comforts, and would pay more for them usually! ...grins, hoping that that brings it back to topic slightly....

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 04:01 PM

she wouldn't leave a rat infested cellar to see me perform

Oh well, whoever you are you're certainly not alone as there's quite a list that might apply to. But even if I were to be dragged from said cellar and forced into sticking pins in my eyes and ears rather than witness (ha! is that a clue?) your performance, I'd still uphold your right to be paid properly for the gig.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 03:22 PM

Ah, Dave (of Mawkin) and Ruth (of a R4 soap).
If only you were running the industry . . .
A trad venue in a recycled cowshed.
And a greenfield festival site across the rolling Ambridge collective farms.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Bernard
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 03:15 PM

Good point, Les...

We have to acknowledge that a website is sometimes the first thing people see.

I try to keep ours as up to date as I can - including photographs.

As a result, my own website tends to be far from up to date!!

Hah! Didn't notice our Guest 02:56 PM posting... I'm pleased to see someone who agrees with me...!!

Yes, the potential demise of Westhoughton is a worry. Ironically, there are also people who will take a sick delight in seeing it go.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Bernard
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 03:01 PM

Sorry, Tom - missed your name off that list!

One of the gigs played by Slide, too (28th March 2004)!!

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Rasener
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:59 PM

Big Al LOL I love your comments.

Tom B
I agree with you. I do the bookings and update the website with links back to each performers website if they have one. It is very important and often overlooked.
Very good point
Les

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:56 PM

As a full time pro I work on the percentage basis against a fair set fee. Generally I break the percentage, sometimes I don't, mainly in the smaller folk clubs I'm still happy to work in. But what hasn't been mentioned here is the amount of work I (and many of my fellow pros)put in on our mailing list. By just asking my audience I conclude that the money I get extra as a percentage over and above my fixed fee comes from people I have personally attracted to a venue they often had no idea existed. Hopefully they will return for other artists. We all put in out effort, but I have to say that over the years the ones who have taken out the least are the organisers who have booked me. My whole working life has been down to their goodwill and hard work. Yes, there are some prats, yes there ae those who will never let me near their audience, but If an artist wastes time feeling bitter about them he'll have a heart attack.
What is saddening is seeing Westhoughton closing. I think this is a template for the future unfortunately. What is needed is for a younger group to come in as residents. Here's a chance to take on a venue with a great audience. If that doesn't happen then it's obvious the clubs will die within the next five years as the organisers enter their retirement and old age, and as road pricing forces the musicians off the road.
I find myself mostly agreeing with Countess Richard although that pains me as I know she wouldn't leave a rat infested cellar to see me perform. However, a fair rate for a fair job. Having just
travelled over 400 miles to do a gig and return home I feel justified on banking the percentage I was paid for a full house in an excellent venue organised by a hard working enthusiast.
Pity it's another week to the next one. However, the bills are covered, the tax is set aside, the books are made up for the accountant, the E mails and letters for the next month's audiences are on their way, the service for the car is booked, the new set of strings is waiting, the agent's percentage is safely stowed, and the Vocalzones ready. Now I need to answer my website feedback E mails.
Be seeing you!

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:55 PM

top priority goes to 'f*lk' and 'club'.

Hear hear, and as a test for the efficiency of a name, hands up anyone who thinks "Glasgow Folk Festival" would have been as successful as "Celtic Connections".

Young people tend to go dancing in the same way that we went singing in the 60's.

Whenever I go to festivals and it must be the same for others there are loads of young people. Ever tried asking them why they don't go to folk clubs?

Let me say again as I have on numerous other threads. Sheffield one of Britain's largest city's struggles to keep a folk club in the traditional sense going in the city centre. But it has a vibrant folk scene with loads of young people taking part also in the city centre. Great for the music - not much use to the professional artist I am afraid.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Bernard
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:54 PM

I still maintain that artistes have an obligation to make use of their mailing lists.

Emails only cost a little time.

Most clubs have a nucleus of regulars, but depend upon the 'casual visitors' to pump up the numbers.

A few months ago we had Boo Hewardine at the Railway. I reckon we had less than 25% of the audience who could be classed as 'regulars' - but the event sold out before the night.

The week before was also a sell-out - the John Wright Band. But he attracted mainly regulars.

The week after was my old mate John Kirkpatrick. Full, but not sold out before the event.

Make of that what you will...

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: GUEST, Tom Again
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:52 PM

and I'm looking forward to Opening that Door again myself this year Bernard!

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: GUEST, Tom Bliss
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:49 PM

and there's this internet thing too. We have dedicated promoter sections on our web site, for each act (solo duo and band), with separate dedicated pages for clubs, festivals and theatres, each with downloadable copy, and posters PA specs etc.

So it's reasonably easy for organisers to pull down whatever they need to help promote a gig. We don't badger our mailing lists all the time though. It's too blunt an instrument for individual gigs and would annoy people after a short while. We do promote tours and specials though.

One problem I've noticed is that there's often a different person doing the bookings and the website. I put up a link to a club site (assuming they have one) the day the deal's done, but it's quite common to find, in the week of the gig, that there's nothing linking back to ours to tell people who we are, and let them listen to us and decide if they want to come along.

Not eveyone uses the web this way, of course, so websites can only reach a percentage of potential people, but it can help.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Bernard
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:45 PM

Here's a thought...

About a month before an Open Door Extravaganza weekend, one of the booked and advertised artistes pulled out. This is a fairly 'big name' who shall remain nameless.

What was the reason? The offer of a festival gig elsewhere with more 'kudos'.

The fee did not come into question... and this artiste is not short of publicity.


Here's another thought...

Do you know which club offered Spiers and Boden their first ever festival gig?

The Open Door - June 2^nd 2002.

They even did another 'Extravaganza' for the same fee to say 'thank you' - March 22^nd 2003.

I know whose integrity I respect...

The guest list at the Open Door is of the best calibre. We've had Martin Carthy, John Kirkpatrick, Harvey Andrews, George Papavgeris, Debra Cowan, Sara Grey, Kieron Means, Brian Peters... and me!

Small but attentive audiences. But we pay the going rate.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:37 PM

good folk club organisers aren't born. most of them run a few crap clubs to start off with.

'the current industry climate' - that slight twitch you felt inside Countess, was the internal bollocksmeter going into buffalo's nadgers mode - warp factor 10, detecting the presence of a verbal infelicity energy field.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Folkiedave
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:31 PM

but the artist doesn't have your local knowledge and contacts. The responsibility for promoting surely lies with promoters and artists. If the promoter is going to say "not my job, mate" they can't moan when nobody turns up.

That's what I would have said.

You make a a number of contacts with local radio and newspapers. Past experience leads me to believe that most local newspapers and especially free sheets will give you loads of copy. The artist will send you material so you don't need a secretary. But the artist does not have the local contacts you have. And if they don't do it automatically, tell them you want it. Many of them will send you posters in advance - all you need is to put the name of your pub/room on and stick them up - or give them someone else to put up in return for free admission.

After the first week or two the thing will run itself.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Dave of Mawkin
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:30 PM

I think what the Countess is trying to say, is that Folk Clubs need to find a decent venue, make the evening a pleasurable experience for all- performer, audience and organiser, and charge relative to what it costs and what the audience are willing to pay. Find a niche, find a market, do market research, even if it isnt a non-profit folk club, treat it like a business.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:29 PM

"perhaps the countess is involved in working for one of the theatres or arts centres? and thinks that audiences will turn to that type of venue if folk clubs do not exist?"

Do you really think people who are profesional arts managers can be arsed to try and run folk clubs out of town so they can get their hands on 30 or 40 punters who turn up once a month? Personally, I've got a 500 seat venue to fill - I'm not in competition with the folk clubs. Not to mention that many folk club attenders attend plenty of venue concerts as well. It's not some sort of political choice.

Subject: RE: Performers fees (% or flat fee?)
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 02:04 PM

my words were I suspect,That is not an accusation.
I suspect you have good intentions[I dont know]
let me tell a story of good intentions.
My old friend Nick Pickett used to regularly play as a support at the Marquee Club in London,The Musicians Union in their wisdom,decided the support acts were not getting enough money.
so they turned round to the management [without thinking it through]and complained
the management said yes we agree with you,so well stopthe support acts.
Nick Pickett was rightly pissed off,hed lost a good gig with good publicity, the musicians union had not asked NICK his views,as far as he was concerned it was not helpful.Your suggestion of increasing door charges ,regardless of local factors is not helpful either