[matilda] Re: Re[2]: gig costs vs party costs - was - proposal for wed 'events' meeting

[Helen and Nick]

Who said anything about doing expensive gigs/parties.
You are taking one event that has happened at matilda
and using that as an example. The people who will be
using this space are DIY gig collectives which are the
same as DIY free party collectives. Events put on by
these people are operated on a miniscule budget and
any money left over after expenses are given to the
bands. If 4 bands play and 50 people pay in £3 thats
£150 less matilda donation, less publicity material
costs - then the rest goes to the bands and sometimes
the promoters might save a little cash to pay for the
publicity for the next gig - its not rocket science.
Its the usual formula - after costs the door money
goes to the bands (assuming profit is made). As helene
said previously, a touring band is usually in
desperate need of cash. Gigs are totally different
from free parties. A gig usually has a responsibility
to pay a band if they are touring. A free party
collective is usually local and not on tour.

Do we have to provide an inventory for every gig? If
gigs have to be financially transparent then so should
every other event and financial activity at matilda.
The collective using the gig space would make a
donation, just as the artists upstairs do but is a
financial limit put on artwork sold? Is a cut asked
for from the artist for using the space upstairs even
though, like a diy collective they have paid for use
of the building. Do we have a say where the artist
spends the profit they have made?




--- cuthbert at riseup.net wrote:

> For me the issue about costs and pricing is to do
> with accessibility, if
> we put on big expensive gigs/parties and therefore
> have to charge alot for
> entry then that makes the event exclusive.  This is
> not a desire to
> micro-manage the gig space.
> 
> Helen made the point that if we put a limit on entry
> prices then we may as
> well put a limit on every financial transaction (she
> gave examples of the
> cafe and art space).  In the case of someone selling
> art that was made
> while in the building, everyone knows where that
> money is going (to the
> artists), the cafe does actually tell people where
> the money is going.  In
> the case of a gig someone is being charged for
> coming into the space and i
> think it is our duty to tell them where the money is
> going (even if the
> 'good cause' is towards the band or promoter). 
> Nobody in the collective
> as far as i know is being paid to do stuff in
> matilda and if someone puts
> on a gig/party where all the profits go to the
> promoter i think that is
> very similar to someone getting paid.
> 
> As far as i know all gigs need to be ok'd by a
> monday meeting anyway and i
> dont see it as a big deal for when a promoter says
> 'can i put this gig
> on?' for them to say the costs are £xxx and any
> money raised above that
> will go to the band or whatever.  However i do think
> that it is a
> nessasary step to ensure that costs dont spiral out
> of control (as i feel
> they did on the c90 night) and therefore prices will
> not become too high
> and any promoter will not be at too much financial
> risk.
> 
> cuthbert
> 
> P.S. If the majority of the opinion at todays
> meeting is against me then i
> will stand aside.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> matilda mailing list
> matilda at lists.aktivix.org
> http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/matilda
> 


		
___________________________________________________________ 
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday 
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com