27 Feb
2014
27 Feb
'14
5:23 a.m.
I heartily endorse (a) the "guarantee + profit sharing" concept of performer
compensation, however the committee works it out, (b) the clear articulation of the
compensation formula and (c) the plan executed as articulated, no matter what nasty
surprise happens when you count the gate (meeting our obligations is part of being
civilized, right?).
(Works for me as an organizer, works for me as a caller. And if as a caller I want
something different, I can ask BEFORE I SAY YES. If the organizers say no, then I can
choose to accept or refuse the gig. Same in reverse - the committee doesn't have to
hire a performer whose compensation requirements are beyond what the committee can or is
willing to provide.)
The dances I've helped organize have had the following "guarantee + profit
sharing" formula: Pay X guarantee per performer, then take out expenses/overhead,
then any remaining gate is split 80/20 (performer compensation/series kitty) with the
performer compensation bonus being divided equally among the performers. Flat fee for
sound (more for a separate provider.) We now cap band guarantees and bonus shares at 4.
(So 5+ musicians divide 4 guarantees/bonuses amongst themselves) The kitty covers
shortfalls. We don't vary our formula.
Many other workable formulas are out there - simpler, more complex. But, in terms of
what's "best", I just shout a big AMEN to Brian Appleberry's comment
below.
If all (or most) of the committee agrees with
the way you're doing the job, and likes the end result, then all should
be well.
Clear communication and general agreement/approval within the committee is crucial.
Beyond that, it's simply the prerogative of the committee to do whatever it wants.
(!!!) As in booking, compensation, sweeping the floor, admission fees, sound provision,
lighting, snacks, promotion... all of it's up to them. Performers, dancers, other
organizers looking on... we can all have our opinions of what that particular committee
"ought" to do, but it's their project. Ideally dance organizers would
welcome and consider well-intentioned input on how to make the series successful and
sustainable, but in the end, it's their series to manage as they will.
One might imagine all of us organizers would aim to continually refine our 'best
practices', but that's ours to decide.
Chrissy
Belfast, ME
PS (Oh how I love a good soapbox.)
"Dance, when you're broken open... dance, when you're perfectly free" ~
Rumi
chrissyfowler.com
belfastflyingshoes.org
westbranchwords.com
From: organizers-request(a)sharedweight.net
Subject: Organizers Digest, Vol 46, Issue 5
To: organizers(a)sharedweight.net
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 22:06:53 -0500
Send Organizers mailing list submissions to
organizers(a)sharedweight.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/organizers
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
organizers-request(a)sharedweight.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
organizers-owner(a)sharedweight.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Organizers digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Booking & treasury - (was: booking as a team?)
(Merle Mceldowney)
2. Re: Booking & treasury - (was: booking as a team?) (Jeff Kaufman)
3. Re: booking as a team? (brianappleberry(a)yahoo.com)
4. Re: Booking & treasury - (was: booking as a team?)
(Mary Anne Eason)
5. Re: Booking & treasury - (was: booking as a team?)
(Merle Mceldowney)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 17:23:55 -0500
From: Merle Mceldowney <merle.mceldowney(a)gmail.com>
To: Mac Mckeever <macmck(a)ymail.com>om>, A list for dance organizers
<organizers(a)sharedweight.net>
Subject: Re: [Organizers] Booking & treasury - (was: booking as a
team?)
Message-ID:
<CAK4w+gpFTV2dwVSa5NisY--gnha_ZJwEcmVwWx1nfZnKM5ijjg(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
There are real down sides in paying musicians based on attendance. There
are lots of factors: competing dances, birthday parties, weather and
somethings that are even more flukey - a transit problem for example.
We do promise a guarantee that makes it almost worth while for the
musicians to come to NYC. Many nights we come out behind on the dances.
Once there is enough admissions to meet our expenses they get half. So it
means that if they attract more of their friends and followers they get
half. Many of our dances do not make enough for basic expenses. We have
to have a rather major fund raising campaign at the end of each year to
make up for our deficits.
NYC is bigger in any way. We have more dances that many places. We
probably pay more rent. We probably have more newcomers over a period of
time. That means we have more people that do not come back.
I hope our experience is helpful to others. One of the things that I think
makes these dances difficult to run is the talent and committment of the
musicians and callers. Most of them work hard practicing, rehearhising,
and making arrangements and programs. There are musicians that have
studied this stuff for years and want to make a living at it. I really
appreciate it and all of us dance organizers need to. However, in the
scheme of thing there are just not that many contra dancers. Those that
do, want to dance weekly but still it is not unusual for there to be 60
dancers in the hall. if we have 200 it is a major feat. Dancers want to
dance frequently so they do not want to pay much. I can get a ticket in
the top row of madison square garden to hear sting sing for 181.00. If we
charge 25 to hear Wild Asparagus, or Perpetual e motion there would be a
revolution. We need to consider financial realities to keep the program
alive.
Merle
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Mac Mckeever <macmck(a)ymail.com> wrote:
I have always struggled with the concept of
paying the band, caller and
sound tech a percent of the admissions. It penalizes them when attendance
is down for something out of their control ( a huge number of dancers went
to an out of town weekend or the weather was really bad) and, of course,
the opposite can be true for good nights.
Instead, we have a standard pay schedule not tied to attendance and make
adjustments for special occasions as needed. We monitor it throughout the
year to be sure it is all evening out. If there is a problem over time, we
tweek our strategy to put us back where we need to be. We have close to
100 events a year - so there is a big enough sample to keep any single
dance from causing a problem.
Mac McKeever
St Louis
________________________________
From: Merle Mceldowney <merle.mceldowney(a)gmail.com>
To: A list for dance organizers <organizers(a)sharedweight.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Organizers] Booking & treasury - (was: booking as a team?)
It can get really complicated. We pay the musicians a set amount with a 50
percent cut of the gate. We need that 50 percent. Many of our dances do
not make the expenses, so the ones
that do well help out with the ones that
loose. We have a saturday night every week from September untill May; that
is a lot of dances. We have been doing this for 60 years. We also run a
weekly english dance.
I have been involved for about 15 years. a long time. I think only three
of the board members have been around longer than me. One problem - and
this often involves payment of musicians is policies get lost over time.
There is a manual available that covers a lot of stuff but when there is a
question the people in charge of the dance do not realize there is a
description of that policy someplace in this large binder we have that has
that stuff.
Merle
On
Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Dana Dwinell-Yardley <danadwya(a)gmail.com
the way home. Definitely not my favorite dance weekend of all time ...)
list
--
*Merle McEldowney*
*212-933-0290*
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 14:37:49 -0800
From: Jeff Kaufman <jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu>
To: Mac Mckeever <macmck(a)ymail.com>om>, A list for dance organizers
<organizers(a)sharedweight.net>
Subject: Re: [Organizers] Booking & treasury - (was: booking as a
team?)
Message-ID:
<CAK36jCNvzf-HLBDEmL=CMp0B0vZOtE0iwwbgL7nu7_JR0Zu8ZA(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Mac Mckeever <macmck(a)ymail.com> wrote:
wrote:
Good heavens: that kind of miscommunication
sounds like no fun at all to
deal with. I'm grateful (especially now that I'm taking on booking
responsibilities!) that we now have a very clear payment system figured
out
in Montpelier.
After we take out our overhead, and pay the sound guy, we split what's
left
evenly between the folks on stage, with a limit
on band size. So:
2-person band (3 people on stage) = 1/3 to caller, 2/3 to band
3-person band (4 on stage) = 1/4 to caller, 3/4 to band
4-or-more-person band (5+ on stage) = 1/5 to caller, 4/5 to band
We also have a minimum guarantee if we have a lower turnout, which isn't
all that often. We subsidized 7 of our 28 dances last year, but we had 4
dances with a huge turnout and well more than that with an above-average
turnout, so it all comes out in the wash.
We make special exceptions to this VERY rarely: for example, last time
our
dance was on New Year's Eve, we paid the band
and caller a little extra
to
stay past midnight.
It took us a while to iron all this out as a committee, but it was well
worth it for the lack of confusion we have now!
Dana Dwinell-Yardley
Montpelier, VT
On
Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:00 PM, <organizers-request(a)sharedweight.net
> wrote:
>
> >
> > >Jerome Grisanti wrote:
> >
> > Make sure you let the treasurer know who is getting paid, and how much
> ...
> > I've been in the uncomfortable situation of handing someone money and
> > having them say, "this is not the agreed amount." I've also been
the
> > caller when the person with the bank asked, "how much do we pay
you?"
> > ... Of course, it's not about the money, but smooth relations.
> >
> > AMEN !
> >
> > In my
experience, lack of clarity on money happens all-too-often.
> It's usually not a big deal, but
occasionally makes a mess.
>
> I still have uncomfortable feelings about a glitch like this -- from
> over a decade ago. At the break, the treasurer came up to me and
> began, "We should have talked about this in advance ..." It turned
> out that instead of the standard payment (which I had been led to
> expect), they wanted to apply a different formula (reducing my pay)
> because of an unusual band situation. I didn't know what to say, but
> observed that I had traveled hundreds of miles, which might also be
> considered unusual ... We concluded the discussion (which occupied
> the break, and
would have been more happily spent socializing, and
planning
the 2nd half) with me saying "Just do whatever seems best to
you."
>
> The organizer felt ruffled and grumpy, I felt ruffled and grumpy. I
> suspect that whatever compromise was achieved was explained to the
> band, so they felt that way, too. Ugh ! A lot of unnecessary
> annoyance over $50 or so.
>
> As Jerome observes, "it's not about the money, but smooth relations."
> It's really worth the extra communication to avoid putting performers
> and volunteer organizers in awkward situations.
>
> (postscript: there was a blizzard on Sunday, and I totaled my car on
>
Scott
--------------------------------------------
Scott(a)ScottHiggs.com
http://www.scotthiggs.com
--
Dana Dwinell-Yardley
graphic design & layout
Montpelier, Vermont
802-229-4008
danadwya(a)gmail.com
_______________________________________________
Organizers mailing Organizers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/organizers
--
*Merle McEldowney*
*212-933-0290*
_______________________________________________
Organizers mailing list
Organizers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/organizers
_______________________________________________
Organizers mailing list
Organizers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/organizers
I have always struggled with the concept of
paying the band, caller and
sound tech a percent of the admissions. It penalizes them when
attendance is down for something out of their control ( a huge number
of dancers went to an out of town weekend or the weather was really
bad) and, of course, the opposite can be true for good nights.
Organizer hat on. I like a "profit sharing" model where you guarantee
a fixed payment and then if you make much more money than usual you
give most of that extra to the performers. Two reasons:
* With a pure percentage system you expose performers to a lot
of risk and variability without much benefit, but if you offer only
a fixed payment then it can be hard to hire performers who play
professionally or come from a ways off.
* Looking over our attendance sheet there's a lot of variability
that looks like noise, but there are consistently performers
who bring in larger crowds. My model is that we have regulars
and newcomers who tend to come regardless of the performers,
plus some occasional dancers who come out to dance when
they're especially excited about who we've booked.
Profit sharing seems to mostly protect performers from variability
that is unrelated to their presence, while still compensating them
well when they bring in a big crowd.
(I do agree about sound. A good sound person makes the band sound a
lot better, but people don't come for the sound person. So pay enough
that you can get someone good, but fixed price is fine.)
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:58:20 -0800 (PST)
From: "brianappleberry(a)yahoo.com" <brianappleberry(a)yahoo.com>
To: A list for dance organizers <organizers(a)sharedweight.net>
Subject: Re: [Organizers] booking as a team?
Message-ID:
<1393462700.32512.YahooMailAndroidMobile(a)web121501.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Regarding booking as a team, or any other work done as a committee/board member,? I think
the most important thing is to talk about what you're doing, in every meeting.? If all
(or most) of the committee agrees with the way you're doing the job, and likes the end
result,? then all should be well.
Cheers,
Brian Appleberry
Queen City Contras
Burlington Vermont
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 21:06:06 -0500
From: Mary Anne Eason <maeason(a)gmail.com>
To: organizers(a)sharedweight.net
Subject: Re: [Organizers] Booking & treasury - (was: booking as a
team?)
Message-ID: <530E9D8E.9040902(a)gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Dana,
How do you have money to pay the minimum on lower turnout nights if you
never keep any money for yourselves?
Mary Anne
On 2/26/2014 3:59 PM, Dana Dwinell-Yardley wrote:
Good heavens: that kind of miscommunication
sounds like no fun at all to
deal with. I'm grateful (especially now that I'm taking on booking
responsibilities!) that we now have a very clear payment system figured out
in Montpelier.
After we take out our overhead, and pay the sound guy, we split what's left
evenly between the folks on stage, with a limit on band size. So:
2-person band (3 people on stage) = 1/3 to caller, 2/3 to band
3-person band (4 on stage) = 1/4 to caller, 3/4 to band
4-or-more-person band (5+ on stage) = 1/5 to caller, 4/5 to band
We also have a minimum guarantee if we have a lower turnout, which isn't
all that often. We subsidized 7 of our 28 dances last year, but we had 4
dances with a huge turnout and well more than that with an above-average
turnout, so it all comes out in the wash.
We make special exceptions to this VERY rarely: for example, last time our
dance was on New Year's Eve, we paid the band and caller a little extra to
stay past midnight.
It took us a while to iron all this out as a committee, but it was well
worth it for the lack of confusion we have now!
Dana Dwinell-Yardley
Montpelier, VT
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:00 PM, <organizers-request(a)sharedweight.net>wrote;wrote:
>> Jerome Grisanti wrote:
> Make sure you let the treasurer know who is getting paid, and how much ...
> I've been in the uncomfortable situation of handing someone money and
> having them say, "this is not the agreed amount." I've also been the
> caller when the person with the bank asked, "how much do we pay you?"
> ... Of course, it's not about the money, but smooth relations.
>
> AMEN !
>
> In my experience, lack of clarity on money happens all-too-often.
> It's usually not a big deal, but occasionally makes a mess.
>
> I still have uncomfortable feelings about a glitch like this -- from
> over a decade ago. At the break, the treasurer came up to me and
> began, "We should have talked about this in advance ..." It turned
> out that instead of the standard payment (which I had been led to
> expect), they wanted to apply a different formula (reducing my pay)
> because of an unusual band situation. I didn't know what to say, but
> observed that I had traveled hundreds of miles, which might also be
> considered unusual ... We concluded the discussion (which occupied
> the break, and would have been more happily spent socializing, and
> planning the 2nd half) with me saying "Just do whatever seems best to
you."
>
> The organizer felt ruffled and grumpy, I felt ruffled and grumpy. I
> suspect that whatever compromise was achieved was explained to the
> band, so they felt that way, too. Ugh ! A lot of unnecessary
> annoyance over $50 or so.
>
> As Jerome observes, "it's not about the money, but smooth relations."
> It's really worth the extra communication to avoid putting performers
> and volunteer organizers in awkward situations.
>
> (postscript: there was a blizzard on Sunday, and I totaled my car on
> the way home. Definitely not my favorite dance weekend of all time ...)
>
>
> Scott
> --------------------------------------------
> Scott(a)ScottHiggs.com
> http://www.scotthiggs.com
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 22:06:21 -0500
From: Merle Mceldowney <merle.mceldowney(a)gmail.com>
To: A list for dance organizers <organizers(a)sharedweight.net>
Subject: Re: [Organizers] Booking & treasury - (was: booking as a
team?)
Message-ID:
<CAK4w+grnc=01GUPPzz8b13_vGnrN29=tABuo3NGQ=B5nC5+95w(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
We have a special circumstance. Our rent is more than 300 We almost
always have the money to pay the band and caller. We frequently fall short
of the rent, but that is not a problem at the dance. We send a letter to
the band with information before. I believe it is in that letter, that if
we do not have the money to pay the talent in the cash box they will get a
check after the dance. That rarely happens. The band can tell that the
crowd was really small so they can not complain when they have to wait a
few days for the money. It is so much worse for us to loose that much on a
dance than it is for them to have to wait a few days for a check. I hope
they feel bad for us then. It is a community dance and they are part of
our community.
Merle
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Mary Anne Eason <maeason(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Dana,
How do you have money to pay the minimum on lower turnout nights if you
never keep any money for yourselves?
Mary Anne
On 2/26/2014 3:59 PM, Dana Dwinell-Yardley wrote:
--
*Merle McEldowney*
*212-933-0290*
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Organizers mailing list
Organizers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/organizers
End of Organizers Digest, Vol 46, Issue 5
***************************************** Good heavens: that kind of miscommunication
sounds like no fun at all to
deal with. I'm grateful (especially now that I'm taking on booking
responsibilities!) that we now have a very clear payment system figured
out
in Montpelier.
After we take out our overhead, and pay the sound guy, we split what's
left
evenly between the folks on stage, with a limit on band size. So:
2-person band (3 people on stage) = 1/3 to caller, 2/3 to band
3-person band (4 on stage) = 1/4 to caller, 3/4 to band
4-or-more-person band (5+ on stage) = 1/5 to caller, 4/5 to band
We also have a minimum guarantee if we have a lower turnout, which isn't
all that often. We subsidized 7 of our 28 dances last year, but we had 4
dances with a huge turnout and well more than that with an above-average
turnout, so it all comes out in the wash.
We make special exceptions to this VERY rarely: for example, last time our
dance was on New Year's Eve, we paid the band and caller a little extra to
stay past midnight.
It took us a while to iron all this out as a committee, but it was well
worth it for the lack of confusion we have now!
Dana Dwinell-Yardley
Montpelier, VT
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:00 PM, <organizers-request(a)sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Organizers mailing list
Organizers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/organizers
wrote:
Jerome Grisanti wrote:
>>
> Make sure you let the treasurer know who is getting paid, and how much
> ...
> I've been in the uncomfortable situation of handing someone money and
> having them say, "this is not the agreed amount." I've also been the
> caller when the person with the bank asked, "how much do we pay you?"
> ... Of course, it's not about the money, but smooth relations.
>
> AMEN !
>
> In my experience, lack of clarity on money happens all-too-often.
> It's usually not a big deal, but occasionally makes a mess.
>
> I still have uncomfortable feelings about a glitch like this -- from
> over a decade ago. At the break, the treasurer came up to me and
> began, "We should have talked about this in advance ..." It turned
> out that instead of the standard payment (which I had been led to
> expect), they wanted to apply a different formula (reducing my pay)
> because of an unusual band situation. I didn't know what to say, but
> observed that I had traveled hundreds of miles, which might also be
> considered unusual ... We concluded the discussion (which occupied
> the break, and would have been more happily spent socializing, and
> planning the 2nd half) with me saying "Just do whatever seems best to
> you."
>
> The organizer felt ruffled and grumpy, I felt ruffled and grumpy. I
> suspect that whatever compromise was achieved was explained to the
> band, so they felt that way, too. Ugh ! A lot of unnecessary
> annoyance over $50 or so.
>
> As Jerome observes, "it's not about the money, but smooth relations."
> It's really worth the extra communication to avoid putting performers
> and volunteer organizers in awkward situations.
>
> (postscript: there was a blizzard on Sunday, and I totaled my car on
> the way home. Definitely not my favorite dance weekend of all time ...)
>
>
> Scott
> --------------------------------------------
> Scott(a)ScottHiggs.com
> http://www.scotthiggs.com
>
>
3719
days inactive
3719
days old
musicians@lists.sharedweight.net
0 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
Chrissy Fowler