Whilst looking through the Gigbeth Collective Memory, I came across a set of notes from the Gigbeth Conference on David Nikel’s excellent blog.

One thing that really leapt out of me was the following quote,

“I had to stick up for promoters in one session where it seemed we got the blame for falling attendances at live performances! Firstly I’m not sure attendances are falling. There are more gigs now than ever before and in my experience this has been demand-led. Promoters were also criticised for not paying bands. I would love to pay every band that plays for me, but it’s just not feasible. I tend to pay a headline band the going rate and then support slots are offered to local bands looking to make a name for themselves. The important point here is those local bands are quite willing to play for free.”

I sincerely hope that blaming promoters for a perceived fall in gig attendences isn’t a common view in the ‘music industry’.

As David rightly points out - I’m not sure that overall attendances are dropping off. The question is of course where this statistic comes from, and as I’ve not seen a bespectacled man in a pinstriped suit, bowler hat, and clipboard at the door of every gig ticking off boxes as people go in, I guess it’s short hand terminology for “attendances at gigs we know we make money out of are dropping”.

On the second point, most promoters I know seem to run at a loss, or only cover their costs (in our case, every penny taken at the door goes directly to the bands, and we hope and pray that bar takings cover the room hire). This is why promoters - who are caught in a difficult balance of covering costs and keeping the door as cheap as possible - can’t always pay bands as much as they would like.

If there are policy makers in the music industry who are unhappy about this then surely some emphasis should be on the redistribution of money from the bits of the music industry which run at a profit (actually, is there a bit of the music industry which runs at a profit at the moment?) down to ‘grassroots level’ where it could be used to allow local promoters to pay bands more and take more risks. For example, Chicks Dig Jerks were thinking about calling it a day earlier this year due to the financial risks involved with promoting locally, and that would have surely been a blow to many bands looking to play in Birmingham and the people who attend as well as the diversity of the local music scene.

I know this idealistic financial support for local music (at the source, as it were) would never happen - who would get the money as “good music” is such a subjective phrase, would the money be no strings attached, which company would ever pay it, how much would it be, how would you apply, what would the criterion be for funding, which promoters *actually* want the stinking money, can a promoter take it and be independent in spirit, can anyone be arsed to fill out yet another form, etc ad infinitum - but the fact that promoters are getting stick at an industry conference makes me worry that somewhere further up the music tree, people are forgetting the hard work and money that promoters put in on a local level, often voluntarily, and often because they love music and not because music generates wealth.

If something is going wrong then the emphasis should be on supporting promoters rather than finger pointing.

This entry was posted on Monday, November 5th, 2007 at 4:23 am and is filed under . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.