Hi all, My band is heavily divided on how we should deal with the money coming in. I'd like to present our case as objectively as possible, so that we can discuss the options and not who's wrong or right. The band consists of five musicians who are all well above the average level on their instrument. All of them want to make a living playing music. All five do all kinds of gigs to make ends meet: playing background music, subbing, teaching, small projects, etc. They are in this one band together, which plays original music and has been together for about a year. The goal of the band is to 'make it', basically. Within a couple of years, we want to be able to have the band as a more or less steady source of income. When starting out, the band has played some gigs for free. Some of these gigs led to paying gigs. The band decided that they want to record professionally in about a year to produce a better demo or possibly an album, which will lead to more gigs. Because all of the band members regularly have other gigs, sometimes not all band members can make every gig. Apart from that, band members can get sick for extended periods of time, get called to tour abroad, etc. Sometimes, subs are called in, but mostly the band will play with band members that are available and change the arrangements to make the songs work. This usually leads to a better performance, than if a sub would be called in and had to learn all the material or read his/her way through the gig. What would be the best way to save up money for studio time? 1. All the money the band makes goes into the band's bank account. Downside: if a band member can't make it to a lot of gigs, he or she is still going to benefit from the money in the bank, which mostly the others worked for. 2. The money made on a gig only goes into the band's bank account if all members played that particular gig. If not everyone was present, the money is split equally among those who played. Downside: the band won't save money very fast. 3. A hybrid of the two options above. Each time money is made, a percentage goes into the bank account, and another percentage gets distributed among those who've played. What do you all think? Thanks very much! By the way, I'm really surprised as to how few threads there are concerning band management and money. It has always been a heavily discussed subject in most of my bands. By the way, part 2. Here's a little extra question... If one of the band members decides to quit the band after a one year. Does he: 1) get his equal share out of the band's bank account. He has worked for it, right? On the other hand, taking one fifth out of the bank account will slow the band down considerably. They would have less money to spend on a studio. Also, when a replacement is found, this person has to 'buy himself' into the band, for all members to have invested the same amount of money. This leads to a simpler option, which is. 2) the person leaving, or being forced to leave, gets nothing.