There is one element that nobody has mentioned, yet I know it for a fact that it features in many of the established artists' thinking: If you have a "following", with people prepared to travel more than 20-30 miles to see you (and I know that at Vin's gigs there are almost always people who have travelled 100 miles or even much longer) then you want there to be some parity in the ticket prices at which people can come and listen to you, both in fairness to your followers and also for the non-subsidised venues. Why would anyone go to see Vin at (say) the Red Lion in Birmingham for £12 if they can go to Bedworth to see him for £7 (subsidised because Bedworth has singers' nights)? You'd end up with a 150-seater venue staying half-empty and a 40-seater one hanging punters from the rafters, and those who went to the "expensive" one feeling cheated.

Price setting is a complex subject and it's no good seeing it from a single perspective, be that the artist's, their agent's, the venue's or the punters'. Whereas for the average performer such issues may not arise, for the more successful ones it is important to get it right, or they risk upsetting their fan club.

I know that Vin cares deeply about keeping things fair for his fans, and in the interests of that he is prepared to take a "hit" and be refused opportunities at some venues. And he is not the only one by a very long chalk.