[matilda] Re: c90/ ticketing and fixed event prices

[gavin at cyber-rights.net]

Okay,

No one has responded to this, and got sidetracked with calling each 
other names. So..

We need to sort something out, as c90 need to have time to promote 
the event. Time is working against us here, unfortunately. I'm 
going to say that the door will be done the same way it was done 
for the lost film fest, which I put on and which nobody has ever 
raised any objections to. There will be no tickets in advance and 
it will be pay on the door. There will be a concessionary price 
slightly lower than the usual price.

Hopefully this resolves things to at least the partial satisfaction 
of everyone, in the most straightforward way I can think of at 
short notice. If people aren't happy with this, then all we can do 
from here is that, learning from this, they can propose a meeting 
to amend the 'guidelines for putting on an event' that's on the 
wiki, and add a door pricing policy to it:

https://wiki.sheffieldsocialforum.org.uk/Events_blueprint

Also, just so you know, C90 did make their own alternative 
proposal:

That they accept losing some money, about £300, and we run the 
door, and the bar, as we please to fit our ideals. We then give 
them a guarantee of £700. This is fairer, in that it means we take 
the risk for our ideals, and avoids the problem of misleading them 
about how things should be organised.

I as an individual am financially unable and unwilling to do this, 
and I think agreeing it beyond that as a collective would mean 
taking it to Monday's meeting. This would leave c90 without enough 
time to promote the event to make sure we actually covered those 
costs. So although it's a pretty good suggestion, with the current 
timeframe I think this isn't a workable solution, unfortunately.

xxx



On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 08:20:00 -0700 gavin at cyber-rights.net wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Ok, this is how it stands at the moment with c90. This has put me 
>as the Matilda liason person in a real awkward position, and I 
>feel 
>shi**y about this, and that we're messing them around. They feel 
>like this, too, I think, though they're being diplomatic  about it 

>
>(some more than others!).
>
>They've had tickets made, which has cost them money, but they're 
>not going to distribute them.
>
>They're very worried indeed about a donations door policy, given 
>they have £1000 to make back to break even. Their artists are 
>travelling from abroad.
>
>So the remaining issue is with the door price. I feel there are 
>two 
>things here:
>
>1. We didn't tell them about this in advance, so it's a breach of 
>trust to spring it on them at this late stage. If it contradicts 
>our principles to have a fixed price, we've failed a little (and 
>we 
>can learn from it), but it would be a bigger failure to breach 
>their trust by forcing a risky policy on these guys AFTER they 
>agreed to do a night. That's not very consensual, and would screw 
>over another group trying to offer an alternative in Sheffield.
>
>2. Previous, similar, events here have NOT had a donation door 
>policy, so there's not even a precedent for it we can point to. We 

>
>have had a concessions door price, though. But this isn't the 
>same. 
>So suddenly having one now isn't even consistent with our previous 

>
>practice.
>
>I have two suggestions, which I have sent to the c90 folks:
>
>1. A fixed price on the door, with "suggested donation" written 
>underneath it. This is what happened for the no borders party. (I 
>think).
>
>2. A fixed price on the door, and a slightly lower price 
>underneath 
>as a concesisonary rate? This is what I did for the lost film 
>fest.
>
>
>
>Get your free encrypted email at http://www.cyber-rights.net
>
>_______________________________________________
>matilda mailing list
>matilda at lists.aktivix.org
>http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/matilda



Get your free encrypted email at http://www.cyber-rights.net