On Fri/Sat nights, there are plenty of great musicians at home watching Netflix or such....
They don't play for two hot dogs and a bag of chips....
They don't play for two hot dogs and a bag of chips....
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Venting: Potential big gig ends up being a freebie
- Thread starter FirewalZ
- Start date
Didn’t say that being there to see racing was an excuse not to pay musicians. Or that it was a “valid” excuse. I said I strongly suspect the fact people were there primarily for another reason could lead to the perceived reduced value of hiring a band in the eyes of the venue management. I didn’t think NASCAR, as opposed to basketball or any other pro sporting event, has any bearing on the economic decision. Knowing as little about NASCAR and racing as I do, I’d have no reason to think the fact it was a NASCAR event would have anything to do with it.
FarmAid is a non-profit. I don’t think you can compare the mechanics of a band’s decision about performing for a charitable or other public service event to someone deciding to work for free for a commercial venue at a for profit event. In truth performing “without pay” for a registered non-profit might even net you some tax deductions as a contribution in kind. Doing the same for a business nets you zero.
Last edited:
I don't think we need to kid ourselves that none of the musicians at Farm Aid, for instance, get paid. It makes no difference that Farm Aid is a non-profit. Goodwill is a non-profit organiization. So is the Red Cross. You might want to see whether their CEO's and other employees work for free. All those band members have to eat, travel to the gig, find a place to stay, etc., etc.. While I'm sure that many of those players are good-hearted folks, I doubt if they are all donating their time. A tax deduction for a contribution in kind doesn't pay for a room at the Holiday Inn or a meal at IHOP.
I was on the board for over 10 years for our county's Relay For Life, a program run by the non-profit American Cancer Society. The ACS employees all are paid employees, with substantial payroll, benefits packages, pension programs, etc., none of which are "free." None of the vendors that provide tents, security, etc., do so for free. All that "not-for-profit" means is that the organization spends as much as it takes in. We are all adults here. Let's not be naive.
You can look up their 990 forms. I just looked at 2017 and there is an expense "Other" listed for the concert that year of 1.3 million. That would likely cover PA, security, other staff, other items not including rent which is a separate line item. Out of that number, if the musicians are being paid, it's a very small amount. Possibly just covering their expenses to get there.
Most of the musicians (especially sidemen) that you think are so generous probably don't have as much money or as nice a house as you or I have. You'd be surprised, I think. It's not optional to give when you are broke.
I get the feeling there’s some agenda going on with you about my comments in this thread. If you look back earlier you’ll see I cautioned about some charities and commented on some of the salaries that are paid by non-profits.
Just for the recird, I’m not naive. And I am an adult. One who doesn’t feel the need sling barbs to make a point. My point (which you might have missed earlier ) was that a donation to a charity - in the form of cash, or goods and services - may have favorable tax consequences. A gift to a business does not.
As far as other people getting, and musicians not getting paid goes, it’s best to remember that those negotiations are entirely between the supplier and the buyer. And the terms will vary on a case by case basis.
Just because everyone else is getting paid (and we might not be seeing a dime) has nothing to do with “fairness” if we’re being truly adult about it.
People who are playing for money are in a market saturated with musicians, many of whom will work for free. Couple that with an arguable drop in public interest in local and non-headliner live music - as evidenced by the decline in the number of venues offering live music - and I think it’s pretty obvious the local music scene is in big trouble and possibly even heading for extinction except for a relatively small number of select places. You can’t even make a case for the local scene being the “farm team” anymore. The industry now has its own managed talent show incubators like: Who Wants to be a Star to draw from. So the economics have become pretty dismal overall. The perceived value is down (aka as in “the well is poisoned), musicians are a house divided, and the market demand curve and metrics have radically changed.
Let’s look at it another way…
If you can get a tank of gas for free at one station, or pay $2.75 a gallon across the street, which station is an adult (who’s not naive
) going to patronize?Is the fact the guy who sells his gas, and happens to be a nice guy with bills to pay, going to sway the average buyer one iota? Or the fact that the free gas station isn’t economically sustainable in the long run going to matter? Drivers will just go to the free station for as long as it remains open before paying for gas if they don’t have to. Some drivers will pay for higher octane fuel regardless of a free offering if they need it Just like venues will pay for better bands - if they require better bands for an event. But if good ‘nuff is good enough for most situations, then very few bands are going to be getting paid very well if at all.
And why?
Because, like the guy at the commercial station, the drivers have their own bills to pay. And just because somebody has money to spend doesn't mean they want to spend it on you. The question of “fairness” never enters into that equation. The drivers aren’t running a gas station or trying to make some money from one. It’s costing them money. And they’re not gas station owners/employees. (Or in our case band members.) So it’s not their baby they hear crying.
Fairness is a concern in ethics, not economics unless said “fairness” improves the economics of the situation.
And if somebody is getting something for dirt cheap or free, their win strategy doesn’t get much better as long as the free supply continues to flow.
And when it comes to music, it does.
(And speaking of economics! I’ve got to finish this client project. So I’m gonna bow out with this post. Carry on!
)
Last edited:
I have no idea why people think these "bad bands" are such a new phenomenon. I've been watching the majority of cover bands suck for 20+ years. The standard has always been relatively low, at least outside of the biggest cities. It just wasn't as noticeable as it is now. Kind of like how the terrible carnivals used to seem awesome, when it was really just the rarity of any kind of rides plus youth that made it seem awesome.
I get the feeling there’s some agenda going on with you about my comments in this thread. If you look back earlier you’ll see I cautioned about some charities and commented on some of the salaries that are paid by non-profits.
Just for the recird, I’m not naive. And I am an adult. One who doesn’t feel the need sling barbs to make a point. My point (which you might have missed earlier ) was that a donation to a charity - in the form of cash, or goods and services - may have favorable tax consequences. A gift to a business does not.
As far as other people getting, and musicians not getting paid goes, it’s best to remember that those negotiations are entirely between the supplier and the buyer. And the terms will vary on a case by case basis.
Just because everyone else is getting paid (and we might not be seeing a dime) has nothing to do with “fairness” if we’re being truly adult about it.
People who are playing for money are in a market saturated with musicians, many of whom will work for free. Couple that with an arguable drop in public interest in local and non-headliner live music - as evidenced by the decline in the number of venues offering live music - and I think it’s pretty obvious the local music scene is in big trouble and possibly even heading for extinction except for a relatively small number of select places. You can’t even make a case for the lical scene being the “farm team” anymore. The industry now has its own managed talent show incubators like: Who Wants to be a Star to draw from. So the economics have become pretty dismal overall. The perceived value is dien (aka as “the well is poisoned), musicians are a house divided, and the market demand curve and metrics have radically changed.
Let’s look at it another way…
If you can get a tank of gas for free at one station, or pay $2.75 a gallon across the street, which station is an adult (who’s not naive
Is the fact the guy who sells his gas, and happens to be a nice guy with bills to pay, going to sway the average buyer one iota? Or the fact that the free gas station isn’t economically sustainable in the long run going to matter? Drivers will just go to the free station for as long as it remains open before paying for gas if they don’t have to. Some drivers will pay for higher octane fuel regardless of a free offering if they need it Just like venues will pay for better bands - if they require better bands for an event. But if good ‘nuff is good enough for mist situations, then very few bands are going to be getting paid very well if at all.
And why?
Because, like the guy at the commercial station, the drivers have their own bills to pay. And just because somebody has money to spend doesn't mean they want to spend it on you. The question of “fairness” never enters into that equation. They’re not running a gas station or trying to make some money from one. It’s costing them money. And they’re not gas station owners/employees. (Or in our case band members.) So it’s not their baby they hear crying.
Fairness is a concern in ethics, not economics unless said “fairness” improves the economics of the situation.
And if somebody is getting something for dirt cheap or free, their win strategy doesn’t get much better as long as the free supply continues to flow.
And when it comes to music, it does.
(And speaking of economics! I’ve got to finish this client project. So I’m gonna bow out with this post. Carry on!
. Peace, love, and black lights...
Mr. 40Hz - I really have no agenda regarding your comments (other than the value of a tax deduction versus actual payment for services). In fact, I agree with just about everything you've said. Peace, love, and tranquility, brother!I get the feeling there’s some agenda going on with you about my comments in this thread. If you look back earlier you’ll see I cautioned about some charities and commented on some of the salaries that are paid by non-profits.
Just for the recird, I’m not naive. And I am an adult. One who doesn’t feel the need sling barbs to make a point. My point (which you might have missed earlier ) was that a donation to a charity - in the form of cash, or goods and services - may have favorable tax consequences. A gift to a business does not.
As far as other people getting, and musicians not getting paid goes, it’s best to remember that those negotiations are entirely between the supplier and the buyer. And the terms will vary on a case by case basis.
Just because everyone else is getting paid (and we might not be seeing a dime) has nothing to do with “fairness” if we’re being truly adult about it.
People who are playing for money are in a market saturated with musicians, many of whom will work for free. Couple that with an arguable drop in public interest in local and non-headliner live music - as evidenced by the decline in the number of venues offering live music - and I think it’s pretty obvious the local music scene is in big trouble and possibly even heading for extinction except for a relatively small number of select places. You can’t even make a case for the lical scene being the “farm team” anymore. The industry now has its own managed talent show incubators like: Who Wants to be a Star to draw from. So the economics have become pretty dismal overall. The perceived value is dien (aka as “the well is poisoned), musicians are a house divided, and the market demand curve and metrics have radically changed.
Let’s look at it another way…
If you can get a tank of gas for free at one station, or pay $2.75 a gallon across the street, which station is an adult (who’s not naive
Is the fact the guy who sells his gas, and happens to be a nice guy with bills to pay, going to sway the average buyer one iota? Or the fact that the free gas station isn’t economically sustainable in the long run going to matter? Drivers will just go to the free station for as long as it remains open before paying for gas if they don’t have to. Some drivers will pay for higher octane fuel regardless of a free offering if they need it Just like venues will pay for better bands - if they require better bands for an event. But if good ‘nuff is good enough for mist situations, then very few bands are going to be getting paid very well if at all.
And why?
Because, like the guy at the commercial station, the drivers have their own bills to pay. And just because somebody has money to spend doesn't mean they want to spend it on you. The question of “fairness” never enters into that equation. They’re not running a gas station or trying to make some money from one. It’s costing them money. And they’re not gas station owners/employees. (Or in our case band members.) So it’s not their baby they hear crying.
Fairness is a concern in ethics, not economics unless said “fairness” improves the economics of the situation.
And if somebody is getting something for dirt cheap or free, their win strategy doesn’t get much better as long as the free supply continues to flow.
And when it comes to music, it does.
(And speaking of economics! I’ve got to finish this client project. So I’m gonna bow out with this post. Carry on!
It’s totally understandable for a venue to book a cheaper act over a more expensive one.
You’re still getting entertainment albeit of a lesser quality.
But the cost outweighs that.
For many venues the only thing that counts is the profit margin...
I understand, but I'm also pointing out that the maximum that they paid out for everything for Farm Aid 2017 minus rent is 1.3 million. I searched for actual numbers instead of hyperbole. There may have been some payout to musicians, but not a lot. Dave Matthews cost $1 million for a typical concert. Willie Nelson is $100-200k. If they were paid, it was a token payment.
I'm speaking more of the sidemen. While a bandleader like Willie may usually charge $100,000, his musicians may only make $1000 or so per show, and they're the ones wwho still need to be paid for every show..The disparity between star and musician pay is a lot greater than you may think.
No I completely understand that sidemen / women get paid sometimes less than what you would be paid delivering pizza. For these large charity gigs, if you're not a full member of the band, it's likely that the band itself is paying the supporting musicians. Farm Aid, overall isn't a very good charity. Less than 35% of proceeds go out to grants, and the administration isn't making a killing either. I guess their main angle is awareness.
You can only do the work of one person, so you would put one person out of work, not many. And generally speaking it wouldn't be a good one. It's the worst one who wouldn't get any work.
Exactly that.
I'm one of them as I play for free every Sunday, and freely rehearse every Tuesday as well. However, if I charge the church, I'll likely be arrested for highway robbery.
Come to think of it, I'm probably worse. I do see my wife head up to the offering basket during service. So, perhaps the better view is I'm paying them to play!
I love it and would think of having it any other way. However, play for free at a commercial, for-profit enterprise? Oh, heck no.
Which is why it is less and less profitable to hire bands, and there is less available money. There are more entertainment options, which cuts demand, and gigs are mostly only weekends now - which adds weekend warrior bands to the supply - increasing the supply. Market forces are fairly simple
