Psychology on Cover Charges, why?

[trevcda]

I think it's even better to pay the bands a little less, and allow them to pass a basket.

I just hate having to panhandle at an establishment I'm performing at. It comes off as desperate, makes the establishment look like they're cheap and underpay their entertainment (obviously they are) and makes me feel like a second class citizens begging for change. If you can't afford five dollars to see a band, stay home. If you can't afford to hire a band, don't hire one. Try paying for toilet paper with "exposure". You'll wish you could afford soap.

I also don't think there's any science to this at all. If I owned a bar - what I'd most likely do is try everything for a while to find out what worked best.

The problem with that idea is that there ends up being no consistency. We've all seen the bar that struggles to find its identity and tries everything, only to alienate all of its potential customers in the process.

 

[madbass6]

I notice a lot of people have personal gripes against cover charges. I've even heard people I considered friends complain about venues charging a cover.

For an event I put together I frankly couldn't get around it. In order to pay the bands a fraction of what they deserve our bar would have to A) Charge a $5 cover, or B) Raise drink prices for the night to about 50 cents.

After surveying customers most people hated the idea of a cover charge, and more people couldnt fathom paying more for their drinks. (exaggeration but you get the point.)

As someone who usually only goes to bars to see live music(aside from when I'm bar tending) I never had issue paying cover, its $5 bucks how cheap can you be? Maybe I'm just empathetic from experience playing gigs either way I'm trying my best to reach out to the live music enthusiasts and make this event a success.

Has anyone figured out the weird psychology of people being cheap when it comes to seeing live music?

I'm thinking its either they don't want to "waste" $5 if it turns out they don't like the band. or maybe they are completely ignorant to why?

in my opinion I think the ones to blame shouldn't be the people that don't want to pay but the establishments/bands/band owners/producers (who ever) that don't charge a cover charge ! to answer your question I guess people figure why pay when they can go elsewhere and get it for free! Can we blame them!

 

[Joe Nerve]

I just hate having to panhandle at an establishment I'm performing at. It comes off as desperate, makes the establishment look like they're cheap and underpay their entertainment (obviously they are) and makes me feel like a second class citizens begging for change. If you can't afford five dollars to see a band, stay home. If you can't afford to hire a band, don't hire one. Try paying for toilet paper with "exposure". You'll wish you could afford soap.



The problem with that idea is that there ends up being no consistency. We've all seen the bar that struggles to find its identity and tries everything, only to alienate all of its potential customers in the process.

As much as I like to argue, I can't argue any of that .

I'm glad I'm not in the club or bar business. And possibly for good reason.

One thing I can't ever get out of my head is the way Lamour in Bklyn built an empire. Only thing was that was in 1979, and this is 2017. What they did in the beginning was charge admission on weekends only, but the club was also open on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Admission was free on those days, and if you went, they gave you free passes for the weekends. Lots of them. They weren't hard to come by. That place wound up being called the Rock Capital of Brooklyn, because it was. It was mobbed. Always. Then some legal stuff happened I think in the late 80s, and it was over. They reopened a bunch of years after that, but charged a heavy duty cover, and it tanked within a few months.

 

[Shimmi]

I'm thinking its either they don't want to "waste" $5 if it turns out they don't like the band. or maybe they are completely ignorant to why?

The psychological term for this is "loss aversion." If you pay to get into a club and the music isn't as good as you want, you've lost the amount you put up initially. People will actually pay MORE to avoid a loss, ironically. Loss aversion and how much we hate to lose - Psychology for marketers

I'd add that people really dislike being forced to listen to anything but their preferred style of music. If the opening act is one style and the following acts are different styles, that's gonna rub a lot of people the wrong way.[/QUOTE]

Excellent link and read!! Thank you

 

[Mike Sorr]

The best answer I can give is that is the general public doesn't value music on a local level, and never really has. I know some cities are exceptions to that, but I'm speaking in general terms. The average person thinks that to be a quality musician/performer you must be on TV, radio, etc. They can't fathom that a guy down the street playing at a bar could be just as "talented" as the stuff they see on TV. It's only gotten worse as the format has become almost 100% digital, and disposable.

The general public seems annoyed by live music in most of the bars and clubs local to me. The crowd would rather have a jukebox playing music in the background than see a live band. There are very, very few live bands that do well and if you're headed out especially for live music, chances are you're going to see one of those handful of bands that manages to get paid to play. I know lots of musicians who still do it for fun because that's all there is. One band I know has actually been managing to get a few gigs opening for known acts in some of the larger clubs, but as far as I'm aware they do it for free and have been for years. At the risk of sounding old, it ain't what it used to be.

My question is, who is buying all the gear and what are they using it for? Here on TB it's easy to find players that own multiple, expensive instruments, amps, effects and so forth. Where are they playing this stuff if there is little to no live music scene?

 

[Mike Sorr]

As much as I like to argue, I can't argue any of that .

I'm glad I'm not in the club or bar business. And possibly for good reason.

One thing I can't ever get out of my head is the way Lamour in Bklyn built an empire. Only thing was that was in 1979, and this is 2017. What they did in the beginning was charge admission on weekends only, but the club was also open on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Admission was free on those days, and if you went, they gave you free passes for the weekends. Lots of them. They weren't hard to come by. That place wound up being called the Rock Capital of Brooklyn, because it was. It was mobbed. Always. Then some legal stuff happened I think in the late 80s, and it was over. They reopened a bunch of years after that, but charged a heavy duty cover, and it tanked within a few months.

I played there many times and had lots of fun doing it. I think we might have even made a buck or two there. But that is a bygone era. That was back when there was a real live music scene and a band could play multiple nights a week, or at least a different packed club every weekend. Times change, not always for the better.

 

[Shimmi]

It a matter of perceived value. If you expect people to plunk down money, you'd better be able to make it worth it or they won't. Keep in mind, I'm on your side here, but you wanted to know why.

That's what I'm hoping to accomplish. We're running drink specials ($2 shots, $3 bombs) we have 20 beers on tap, we make specialty drinks (doesnt seem like much but most venues that have bands normally got shots and pbr for booze, so I think its worth mentioning) also keeping the kitchen open to 11 pm

And lastly $5 cover also includes you're first pint. So basically paying $2.50 for a full night of music.

I personally would hop on this in a heart beat but I'm not a customer i'm just hoping to reach the demographic of people who support art and music, such as myself. But its kinda hard, a lot of people react negatively to cover charges in general. Granted if it was a strip club or a DJ playing I would much rather pass but Im one of those Dinosaurs that's all about live original music.

A lot of bands don't have recordings, much less good recordings, but provide music entertainment that I get more value from than any "established" artist I'd pay $60 to see in a crowd with 1000 people.

Maybe theres not many people who've had that kinda experience with live music so they truly don't know the benefit. Honestly the only bands I caught live that I wasnt fond of are super metal bands, but thats why I avoid metal shows.

 

[Shimmi]

In my experience, it boils down to this:
Could be randoms bar hopping. Could be regulars. Could be someone who rarely goes out and picked that night and that bar.

I don't plan on anyone showing up by accident. If someone drives by and sees its a full house and wants in, great, but $5 bruh, here's your $2.50 drink chip have fun.

 

[Shimmi]

Because, even with a full house and a cover charge, the bar just "never seems" to do good enough to give the band a bonus. Cover charges are a scam and one would be naive to think one gets any part of it as a band member.

I won't pay cover charges and take my business elsewhere. I have a predetermined amount to spend when I go out for drinks and I will get my money's worth.

Wow, what band and/or bar owner stole your wife and dog? lol jk

I'm curious as to why you feel this? The only situations I've seen where a local band doesnt get a portion of the cover is if there's a band from out of state then most the cover would go to them since they traveled hundreds of miles and the local talent traveled 15 miles. Aside from that being apart of seting up shows, or as a band I've always given cover charge and accepted it.

Or are you just demonstrating others mindsets?

 

[klejst]

Cover charges are usually just another way for venues to make more money off bands who most times in return if you're lucky will get paid peanuts.

 

[twinjet]

Wow, what band and/or bar owner stole your wife and dog? lol jk

I'm curious as to why you feel this? The only situations I've seen where a local band doesnt get a portion of the cover is if there's a band from out of state then most the cover would go to them since they traveled hundreds of miles and the local talent traveled 15 miles. Aside from that being apart of seting up shows, or as a band I've always given cover charge and accepted it.

Or are you just demonstrating others mindsets?

Personal experience and word-of-mouth. When bars pay crap, bands talk to each other. Especially in a medium-sized town of only 300,000.

 

[Shimmi]

Personal experience and word-of-mouth. When bars pay crap, bands talk to each other. Especially in a medium-sized town of only 300,000.

A large town consists of 100,000 max... That's a big old city. Yeah I wouldn't have experience but seems to me venues in your area must be cheating musicians or maybe running a club is super expensive. :/

 

[Passinwind]

If they had a system where your cover pays for your first beer, then I'd be in, but they haven't thought of that or don't like the idea.

I've actually been to quite a few clubs that charged no cover, with a two drink (typically) minimum.

 

[catcauphonic]

Here in Seattle the $5 cover is gone the way of the dodo in favor of $7 or $8 to be the norm (outside of the DIY scenes of punk houses and basement rooms.) That's for original acts trying to build up some steam.

If someone is local or in town who's known to bring em in, then it jumps up to the $10-15 range, and the difference in cut always goes to them (even if they're not a huge draw, but from out of state, we'll usually still offer them a bigger cut of the smaller pie if they don't suck.)

I used to not like cover charges when I wanted to go bar hopping with or to meet up with friends, but now I rarely go out to bars unless it's to hear live music, which is still just about weekly.

Sometimes going out for a few hours can get expensive ... not three digit expensive, but it adds up monthly depending on how much you drink (+ other factors like parking and/or getting around, eating out in a night, etc.)

I'm not sure exactly what our pay is usually based on between the door, the booze sales, or both when someone hands us money at the end of the nite (that's not why we do it, fortunately) and I'm sad to say there is a wide pool of talent in this town that's just as undercompensated.

 

[Shimmi]

It was at the Broadberry:
If they had a system where your cover pays for your first beer, then I'd be in, but they haven't thought of that or don't like the idea.

Well here's hoping that system works here.

 

[Jay Corwin]

The general public seems annoyed by live music in most of the bars and clubs local to me. The crowd would rather have a jukebox playing music in the background than see a live band. There are very, very few live bands that do well and if you're headed out especially for live music, chances are you're going to see one of those handful of bands that manages to get paid to play. I know lots of musicians who still do it for fun because that's all there is. One band I know has actually been managing to get a few gigs opening for known acts in some of the larger clubs, but as far as I'm aware they do it for free and have been for years. At the risk of sounding old, it ain't what it used to be.

My question is, who is buying all the gear and what are they using it for? Here on TB it's easy to find players that own multiple, expensive instruments, amps, effects and so forth. Where are they playing this stuff if there is little to no live music scene?

I guess I'm lucky to be near Buffalo right now, as the city has really rebounded and is thriving again. There are tons of good places to play all over the region, and everyone gets paid for the most part. Don't get me wrong - no one is getting rich playing three sets at the bar, but the gigs are there. I've played every kind of gig you can think of over the last couple of years here, and there are almost always people whether it's a cover charge, ticket, or free in the door. We also seem to have a TON of musicians around here to which helps.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

That's what I'm hoping to accomplish. We're running drink specials ($2 shots, $3 bombs) we have 20 beers on tap, we make specialty drinks (doesnt seem like much but most venues that have bands normally got shots and pbr for booze, so I think its worth mentioning) also keeping the kitchen open to 11 pm

And lastly $5 cover also includes you're first pint. So basically paying $2.50 for a full night of music.

I personally would hop on this in a heart beat but I'm not a customer i'm just hoping to reach the demographic of people who support art and music, such as myself. But its kinda hard, a lot of people react negatively to cover charges in general. Granted if it was a strip club or a DJ playing I would much rather pass but Im one of those Dinosaurs that's all about live original music.

A lot of bands don't have recordings, much less good recordings, but provide music entertainment that I get more value from than any "established" artist I'd pay $60 to see in a crowd with 1000 people.

Maybe theres not many people who've had that kinda experience with live music so they truly don't know the benefit. Honestly the only bands I caught live that I wasnt fond of are super metal bands, but thats why I avoid metal shows.

I truly wish you well.

One thing I neglected to say earlier, and this comes from an observation this past weekend at Busch Gardens. In general what the public is buying is not so much musical virtuosity as much as it's buying personalities. As long as they can dance, engage the audience, carry a tune, and look like they are having a great time doing it, the crowd goes bonkers. It didn't matter much if the band behind the act sucked or not, they just needed to be reasonably tight.

While I think discounts on food and drinks could be good drawing cards, as for the cover charge, you are selling entertainment, not a bunch of notes. Acts need to be varied and engaging.

I like live music too, but frankly, I could close my eyes and have a wonderful evening with a live band. I'll bet there are maybe less than 10% of the population that can do that. For the rest, it's about the visual, and if I was hireing the bands for an establishment with a cover, that would be priority, with a close second being a commercial song set list.

You run with that premise, and it should work for you. It may take time for word to get around.

Speaking of the word getting around. The other thing is social media. This is a must today.

Ever wonder why you have valued customer agreements with your grocer? Try this on for size, offer a 5% discount to sign up. You build up an base of email addresses to send notices of bar and food promos, not to mention your entertainment acts. You can also send surveys to find out what works and what doesn't work.

 

[JMacBass65]

Tickets, or $20 at the door are the same thing. The show would still have been sold out. The band is a tribute, and say what you want about tributes, they can make great money, and never sell an album. They will never be national, and never be a household word.
I was playing in a pickup band for one night. They bar owner said 'You know you guys played 10 Willie Nelson songs?'
Yeah... So come back next time as a Willie tribute and I'll give you a $1000.

After your first few posts, I knew in my gut you were talking about a tribute band. There was simply no way you were talking about an originals act.

 

[bass12]

People tend to value what society tells them to value. There was a time when going to a club to see a live band was cool, and people were fully prepared to pay a cover. We are no longer living in such a time. Instead, we live in a time when the average person feels their $5.00 would be better spent on a dolled-up cup of coffee than on a band or, heaven forbid, five songs from iTunes. Glance through the newspaper and the space that used to be dedicated to music and the arts is now likely to be occupied by articles about food and the latest trendy chef (sporting the requisite sleeve tattoos). Live music just isn't very cool at the moment.

 

[Paulabass]

People tend to value what society tells them to value. There was a time when going to a club to see a live band was cool, and people were fully prepared to pay a cover. We are no longer living in such a time. Instead, we live in a time when the average person feels their $5.00 would be better spent on a dolled-up cup of coffee than on a band or, heaven forbid, five songs from iTunes. Glance through the newspaper and the space that used to be dedicated to music and the arts is now likely to be occupied by articles about food and the latest trendy chef (sporting the requisite sleeve tattoos). Live music just isn't very cool at the moment.

So very true!! There have been times that I really felt we were annoying the 'audience', who wanted to watch T.V. There are very few Live Music Venues left, I miss the old days- paint a room black, put a stage in it. No televisions. In Canada, hockey season has always been the bane of live music, and now it's 11 months, and 3 weeks long. If ONE person wants to watch the game, and 159 want to watch the band- The game always wins!