Nancy:
> The point is simply this. SXSW seems to have a good racket going with the
> ticket price, registration price, hotel deals bla bla bla. Damn they have got
> to make a lot of money. SOmeone is making a lot of money. DO they have to keep
> all of it. Can any more of it go back to the bands somehow? All I am hearing
> are the stories that it was great, but stressfull, we ate peanut butter for a
> month afterward, etc....
Damn, they *do* make a LOT of money and the bands see squat.
You don't have to persuade me, I agree with you wholeheartedly.
Obviously the players are getting screwed and everyone knows
that. It's just that many people are happy with this status quo or
rationalize it in one way or another. That's the way the music
industry works, actually.
Thinking about popular music from a labor-managment perspective is a
very depressing and/or eye-opening practice. I've often wondered if
there's any real possibility of change in this area, but I suspect
there's not. Making music is literally a labor of love for the vast
majority of people who do it. And as we all know, virtually all
bands operate at a loss. I don't begrudge any successful act their
hard-earned money, but it just ain't true that hustling for exposure
is "paying dues" that may some day pay off in this particular
industry. It's a way to maintain enough visibility to be able to
perform at a loss for a longer period of time. Promoters and labels
have all the cards, financially speaking, and 99% of performers do it
until they can't tolerate the financial and work deficit it puts them
under any longer.
So Nancy, Amen and keep testifyin'!! <g>
--junior
