1 Jul
2010
1 Jul
'10
4:50 p.m.
On Thursday 01 July 2010 08:59:19 Patrick Shirkey wrote:
From what I have been hearing there are venues that no longer have live bands
supposedly because of the CS costs. So there you might have more venues to
play at and then more exposure.
For those currently doing the live bands, that would be money not being paid
out. Since the bands know this they can ask for a cut.
Alternately, depending on the band and their willingness to accept risk, they
can perhaps make a deal to get the door and do their own promotion and sink
or swim based on the results of their promotion.
all the best,
drew
On 07/01/2010 10:51 PM, drew Roberts wrote:
Indeed. The person will need to get some bang for their buck.
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 13:38:39 you wrote:
And getting worse.
You/We would need a credible following first. Maybe we can get a
subscription to LAM going but it would probably only be a trickle of <
$100 per month at the moment. On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:28 PM, drew
Roberts<zotz(a)100jamz.com> wrote:
I think it is worth some serious experimenting and efforts on the before
and at phases to see what we can come up with before we discount them out
of hand.
Anyone else interested?
So, you think that the before and at options are
not viable?
i don't believe that the before or at options are viable for the
overwhelming majority of artists& creatives. i think that "before/at"
can probably work for programmers working on contract work. >
i'm fine (to some extent) with the conclusion that we, as a society,
> no longer wish to pay artists& creatives to do what they do. but if
> that's really going to be the conclusion, we'd better think very
> carefully about all the side effects. i'm not sure its pretty, and it
> may be even less pretty than the world in which disney and sonny bono
> get everything they ask for.
This I seriously doubt. Putting someone off the internet for *being
accused* of violating copyright three times is way over the top.
its certainly awful, as are your other examples. on the other hand, i'm not sure quite how the
mixture of easy
distribution via the net but almost no paid compensation for most
artistic work would compare the situation we've had for on the order
of 100 years, in which it was feasible for quite a lot of artists to
make a living by being artists.
Let's brainstorm and run some experiments and see what we can learn and
document it for everyone.
One new thought I just had was making early access the thing you charge
for. People can pay to be the first to have your new hit. For those able and willing to perform. A world
without collection
societies might/should free up more money on the part of the venue folks
to pay to the performers.
Highly unlikely the performers would se the money. Venues tend to make
most of their profits on drinks not tickets. Tickets usually go someway
towards paying for the cost of the venue, staff, marketing, artists,
travel, accomodation, etc... The rest is covered by sponsors if you are
lucky but usually only in kind and not with cash payments.