London Open Mics / Open Spots Page 4

Quote: sootyj @ August 30 2011, 12:04 PM BST

So what about work experience or internships?

I mean if I want to work in film or television or fashion. Then I expect to fetch a lot of coffee and do a lot of photocopying.

View original

What about them?

I am well aware that many of these methods of draining unpaid manual labour out of other people's ambition exist in other areas of the performing arts on a much more industrialised scale. That doesn't make them right and it isn't an argument for importing them into stand-up. There is a reason, according to Equity, that the Entertainment industry has more NMW breeches than any other sector of the economy and you don't have to be too bright to work it out.
There is corruption in one place is not an argument for creating corruption in another place.

Not everyone in stand up is a bum graduate on the dole either some of us are professional businessmen and if I wanted a graduate to do manual labour for me I would pay them. Exploiting people's ambition to drain manual labour out of them is immoral. No matter what industry it is in.

We are not in the film industry or luvvies we are comedians - we are here to take the piss out social systems that are obviously nonsense. It's called satire. Satire keeps the world from going insane and areas of the comedy "industry" are ripe for it.

Ok I work as a manager in social care. I started off as an unpaid volunteer some years ago. And I'd pretty much expect any one wanting to work for me to do the same.

There's nothing wrong in asking people to help out or show commitment. I should add that I was able to work whilst volunteering.

Comparing starting off in a career working 40 hours a week, with dicking about on a stage a couple of times a week is a false premise.
Yes internships should be paid or one should at least be able to claim benefits to prevent financial aparhteid.

But that isn't standup.

I agree there's nothing wrong in asking people if they can help by bringing mates.
However, the fact is those people are doing YOU a favour.
It is wrong to take a date out someone's diary and then tell them (often the night before) that if they don't bring mates you won't put them on ... which is what people do in reality.

And somehow what starts as someone doing someone else a favour can very quickly turn into the promoter feeling a sense of entitlement that they're not really entitled to.

Also very few people who "do you a favour" in my experience want nothing for it.

Of course if theoretically the promoter and the acts were all unpaid you might be able to at a stretch argue that insisting people bring mates is moral but why would anyone compere and promote a load of new acts in the first place if they weren't getting paid something for it. You would very quickly lose your MC and acts to paid gigs if they were any good leaving your gig with the absolute bottom of the comedy circuit : the terminally unfunny, totally inexperience and the slightly mentally deranged. This is show BUSINESS - no one puts on a gig not expecting some kind of financial return or at least to break even. Such a gig as described is a theoretical possibility not an actual functioning reality.

"Comparing starting off in a career working 40 hours a week, with dicking about on a stage a couple of times a week is a false premise."

But I have never said that open spots should be immediately paid for their work. I have simply said they don't owe anyone unpaid manual labour. Which I think is fair. You can give people a lot of open spots on the basis you're helping them to learn their craft by giving them stage time to experiment. You can't say that of giving out flyers or making free phone calls. Nothing is being "learnt" or tested - they are just being used for free labour.
Again this is why I have a page so that the message cannot be blurred or perverted ... also the phrase "dicking about" says much of how you see these people. You do not see them as professionals precisely because they are prepared to do manual labour for free. They are just "graduates" who are "dicking about". This is not true. Many of them are very serious about what they do and in it for a career - even if they don't have the talent to become full time pros it is wrong to devalue them in this way.

No good deed goes unpunished.

Quote: Anthony Miller @ August 30 2011, 12:44 PM BST

I agree there's nothing wrong in asking people if they can help by bringing mates.
However, the fact is those people are doing YOU a favour.
It is wrong to take a date out someone's diary and then tell them (often the night before) that if they don't bring mates you won't put them on ... which is what people do in reality.

And somehow what starts as someone doing someone else a favour can very quickly turn into the promoter feeling a sense of entitlement that they're not really entitled to.

Also very few people who "do you a favour" in my experience want nothing for it.

Of course if theoretically the promoter and the acts were all unpaid you might be able to at a stretch argue that insisting people bring mates is moral but why would anyone compere and promote a load of new acts in the first place if they weren't getting paid something for it. You would very quickly lose your MC and acts to paid gigs if they were any good leaving your gig with the absolute bottom of the comedy circuit : the terminally unfunny, totally inexperience and the slightly mentally deranged. This is show BUSINESS - no one puts on a gig not expecting some kind of financial return or at least to break even. Such a gig as described is a theoretical possibility not an actual functioning reality.

"Comparing starting off in a career working 40 hours a week, with dicking about on a stage a couple of times a week is a false premise."

But I have never said that open spots should be immediately paid for their work. I have simply said they don't owe anyone unpaid manual labour. Which I think is fair. You can give people a lot of open spots on the basis you're helping them to learn their craft by giving them stage time to experiment. You can't say that of giving out flyers or making free phone calls. Nothing is being "learnt" or tested - they are just being used for free labour.
Again this is why I have a page so that the message cannot be blurred or perverted ... also the phrase "dicking about" says much of how you see these people. You do not see them as professionals precisely because they are prepared to do manual labour for free. They are just "graduates" who are "dicking about". This is not true. Many of them are very serious about what they do and in it for a career - even if they don't have the talent to become full time pros it is wrong to devalue them in this way.

No good deed goes unpunished.

View original

Yes, the comedian is doing the promoter a favour by bringing a friend and should, to my mind, be acknowledged for that favour. In the scenario I'm talking about where no one is making a profit, a "thanks" is surely enough though? And of course the act should know when they sign up if the promoter has a bringer policy, that's just common courtesy.

In the end it really comes down to the promoter, doesn't it? I would say there are plenty promoter/acts out there doing what they do not for money but, as mentioned previously, for the extra stage time it affords them. They get to choose how long they perform for, try out new material on home turf regularly and network with other comics. Perhaps their night generates good word of mouth and builds to something bigger one day - maybe they even put enough hard work in that they become a paid comic off the back of it. Nothing to say a promoter/act with integrity can't do that, even if they do enforce a bringer policy in their early days. I've met good people who do just this and feel the same way as you do about P2P and paid bringers.

What I'm saying is that there is an important distinction to be made between:

1. Unscrupulous promoters willing to bleed new comics and their friends for profit.

2. Promoter/acts who run free nights for no profit in order to improve as comedians and/or because they genuinely enjoy showcasing new talent.

Without making that distinction you're tarring those two types with the same brush and doing exactly what I would hope you're not trying to achieve - muddying good people's values in a bid to outlaw a practice you personally object to.

Maybe. But I can't think of any real life examples of 2.
And I don't see why the fact you can't make a profit makes it okay to use open spots as a source of free manual labour. Why is it that because you are really bad at business that vindicates what you are doing?

I've been making money out of open spots for years without forcing them to do unpaid manual labour. Even when I and all the acts we booked were hideously unfunny I managed to make a profit out of running a gig - not a very big one but it was a profit none-the-less. If it didn't at least break even and make a tiny profit we wouldn't do it. I would say that if you are continually making no money week after week and leaning on people to bring mates you need to seriously reconsider your business model. Perhaps even attempt paying some of the acts and taking a financial risk on someone coming and buying tickets or beer?

So in my view if any people/gigs of type 2 exist then I have to wonder how - because actually I can't think of any...
I mean really... if you can't make money out of open spots then you must be really shit at business.

As I said if these people are genuinely doing you a favour (i.e. you have a real emotional relationship with them or they genuinely wanted to bring mates) then that would indeed be okay but in my experience MCing a gig of completely new acts is really hard because after 3 die in a row the MC cannot rescue it. Indeed it is so hard that I never MC Pear Shaped on my own and always have a co-MC. And Pear Shaped isn't even ALL new acts - it is 2 paid, 2 comperes, 10 opens.

I do not understand why anyone would MC a gig with no paid acts for literally no renumeration. They'd have to be mad? Actually I can think of one example that was okay ... but they didn't lean on anyone to bring mates.

We'll have to agree to disagree but personally I don't think I'd have the cheek.

Quote: Anthony Miller @ August 30 2011, 1:35 PM BST

Maybe. But I can't think of any real life examples of 2.
And I don't see why the fact you can't make a profit makes it okay to use open spots as a source of free manual labour. Why is it that because you are really bad at business that vindicates what you are doing?

I've been making money out of open spots for years without forcing them to do unpaid manual labour. Even when I and all the acts we booked were hideously unfunny I managed to make a profit out of running a gig - not a very big one but it was a profit none-the-less. If it didn't at least break even and make a tiny profit we wouldn't do it. I would say that if you are continually making no money week after week and leaning on people to bring mates you need to seriously reconsider your business model. Perhaps even attempt paying some of the acts and taking a financial risk on someone coming and buying tickets or beer?

So in my view if any people/gigs of type 2 exist then I have to wonder how - because actually I can't think of any...
I mean really... if you can't make money out of open spots then you must be really shit at business.

As I said if these people are genuinely doing you a favour (i.e. you have a real emotional relationship with them or they genuinely wanted to bring mates) then that would indeed be okay but in my experience MCing a gig of completely new acts is really hard because after 3 die in a row the MC cannot rescue it. Indeed it is so hard that I never MC Pear Shaped on my own and always have a co-MC. And Pear Shaped isn't even ALL new acts - it is 2 paid, 2 comperes, 10 opens.

I do not understand why anyone would MC a gig with no paid acts for literally no renumeration. They'd have to be mad? Actually I can think of one example that was okay ... but they didn't lean on anyone to bring mates.

We'll have to agree to disagree but personally I don't think I'd have the cheek.

View original

Just because you can't see the value in something or haven't witnessed it personally, that doesn't make it worthless. To you, comedy is a business. To others it's not (or at least that isn't their primary concern). They aren't "shit at business", they simply aren't interested in making a financial profit. They don't see what they're doing as forced manual labour simply because the acts on stage are there because they want to be and the guests they're bringing are there for the same reason.

Personally, I find it more morally objectionable to make money on a gig peopled with "hideously unfunny" comics than run a bringer and charge no one. What you're doing is "cheek" to my mind. Still, that's your business and more power to you. I certainly won't be mounting a campaign to try and stop you.

Profit isn't a dirty word and just because you're not in comedy to make a huge profit doesn't mean you can't be aiming towards being in it to break even or aim to run in a businesslike way. Pear Shaped doesn't operate in order to turn a huge profit but it has to operate in a businesslike way in order to function.
It has to maintain a turnover. If you have no turnover how do you retain and pay the best acts to make the night good so people will return and how do you pay for your advertising. These are facts of life that I learnt the hard way having started from a point of ridiculous idealism.

If all your acts are genuinely happy to help you put on your free night ...as might be the case if for example you were a comedy troupe who all knew each other personally or an impov group then I see nothing wrong with that and if you see the CRAPP page you will see we have made an attempt to caveat out this type of gig.

However, if you do not have an emotional bond with all the acts who you ask to do free manual labour for you then you will forgive me for being slightly cyncial. Ultimately the page is a theory of human nature and I stand by what it says. Of course you don't have to 100% agree with it (quite a few people disagree) but personally I would much rather be accused of ripping off the public than ripping off acts. Yes our early gigs were pretty disasterous. But I don't see what's wrong with learning by making mistakes and I don't feel the need to cloak the fact that the gig makes a profit. Most social endeavours require a turnover to fund them.

Quote: Anthony Miller @ August 30 2011, 2:06 PM BST

Profit isn't a dirty word and just because you're not in comedy to make a huge profit doesn't mean you can't be aiming towards being in it to break even or aim to run in a businesslike way. Pear Shaped doesn't operate in order to turn a huge profit but it has to operate in a businesslike way in order to function.
It has to maintain a turnover. If you have no turnover how do you retain and pay the best acts to make the night good so people will return and how do you pay for your advertising. These are facts of life that I learnt the hard way having started from a point of ridiculous idealism.

If all your acts are genuinely happy to help you put on your free night ...as might be the case if for example you were a comedy troupe who all knew each other personally or an impov group then I see nothing wrong with that and if you see the CRAPP page you will see we have made an attempt to caveat out this type of gig.

However, if you do not have an emotional bond with all the acts who you ask to do free manual labour for you then you will forgive me for being slightly cyncial. Ultimately the page is a theory of human nature and I stand by what it says. Of course you don't have to 100% agree with it (quite a few people disagree) but personally I would much rather be accused of ripping off the public than ripping off acts. Yes our early gigs were pretty disasterous. But I don't see what's wrong with learning by making mistakes and I don't feel the need to cloak the fact that the gig makes a profit. Most social endeavours require a turnover to fund them.

View original

I certainly never meant to imply that profit is a dirty word - I'm striving to become a professional comedian myself and very much plan to get paid when the time comes.

I should also add that the free bringer gigs I've been citing aren't ones I run personally - the night I host doesn't ask acts to bring guests. I've chosen not to cite the names of the people who run the bringers I have in mind because I don't wish to bring them into this debate without their permission.

I agree there's absolutely nothing wrong with learning from mistakes so long as that goes across the board - ie it doesn't apply to everyone except yourself. I think it's great that you're running a gig at a profit, don't hide behind a false name and openly admit that part of your reason for mounting this campaign is that you feel bringers and P2P impact on your business. What I'm less impressed with is your assumption that everyone who runs a bringer is either a cold-hearted profit monger or else someone with no business savvy who ought not to be involved in comedy. Some do it simply because they enjoy it, and to those people I say good luck. You talk about not burning bridges and offending peers who might one day have an effect on your career but I can't help but think that slinging mud in the eye of those comics, whether you think they're hopeless idealists or not, is a contravention of that ethic.

Well, I have to point out that you didn't start from the point of this theoretical "no profit" bringer. From starting from the position that bringers in general were okay I argued you into a position where you postulated the example of the no profit bringer which in order to stay "ethical" has to never charge anyone or make a profit.

In other words it is victim of it's own back-to-front logic. In order to stay "ethical" it has to not charge in any way (we'll leave out that asking people to do unpaid labour is charging them on the theoretical basis that actually everyone knows the promoter personally and is happy - which is stretching credulity but we'll go there)... What have you got? You have a prototype business that cannot grow. It relies on it's bringer ideology to bring an audience but dare not charge any willing audience or take a fee off the landlord for fear of crossing the line and becoming "unethical".

So it is doomed forever to be a bringer and have no turnover so how are the acts at it ever going to escape to the professional circuit they aspire to? I believe it is nonsense. Surely even if you didn't want to charge a ticket price and keep free entry you could suggest people make a contribution at the end. Phil Klein used to run gigs this way and still manage to make enough to keep himself in beer doing his own flyering.
There shouldn't be a need to run bringers. You cannot ask acts to bring mates and be "professional". It just doesn't wash. I don't but it. The situation becomes further blurred as when then seems to happen said acts run a professional gig and a bringer in a different location using the acts aspirations to do the professional gig to get them to do the bringer.
Suddenly not so simple, is it?

I'm touched that you care about my career but I would point out there is a difference between "slinging mud" and pointing out financial relaities. Also we would never have acted if the situation had not deteriorated to being not just undesirable but seriously out of control. Actually I don't think the CRAPP campaign has at all damaged my career. As FDR would have said there really is nothing to fear but fear its self.

At the end of the line you only get one life - if at the end of it you'd said nothing ...what would be the point?

Quote: Anthony Miller @ August 30 2011, 2:52 PM BST

Well, I have to point out that you didn't start from the point of this theoretical "no profit" bringer. From starting from the position that bringers in general were okay I argued you into a position where you postulated the example of the no profit bringer which in order to stay "ethical" has to never charge anyone or make a profit.

In other words it is victim of it's own back-to-front logic. In order to stay "ethical" it has to not charge in any way (we'll leave out that asking people to do unpaid labour is not charging them on the theoretical basis that actually everyone knows the promoter personally and is happy - which is stretching credulity but we'll go there)... What have you got? You have a prototype business that cannot grow. It relies on it's bringer ideology to bring an audience but dare not charge any willing audience or take a fee off the landlord for fear of crossing the line and becoming "unethical".

So it is doomed forever to be a bringer and have no turnover so how are the acts at it ever going to escape to the professional circuit they aspire to? I believe it is nonsense. Surely even if you didn't want to charge a ticket price and keep free entry you could suggest people make a contribution at the end. Phil Klein used to run gigs this way and still manage to make enough to keep himself in beer doing his own flyering.
There shouldn't be a need to run bringers. You cannot ask acts to bring mates and be "professional". It just doesn't wash. I don't but it. The situation becomes further blurred as when then seems to happen said acts run a professional gig and a bringer in a different location using the acts aspirations to do the professional gig to get them to do the bringer.
Suddenly not so simple, is it?

I'm touched that you care about my career but I would point out there is a difference between "slinging mud" and pointing out financial relaities. Also we would never have acted if the situation had not deteriorated to being not just undesirable but seriously out of control. Actually I don't think the CRAPP campaign has at all damaged my career. As FDR would have said there really is nothing to fear but fear its self.

At the end of the line you only get one life - if at the end of it you'd said nothing ...what would be the point?

View original

But they aren't "theoretical" gigs, they're "undisclosed" gigs - undisclosed because I'm not certain whether or not you'll lump the promoters in with your list of contemptables and seek to do their reputations unwarranted harm.

As for "prototype business", once again I'll say I'm not talking about business. A business exists to make a profit, so a bringer gig where nobody is re-numerated can't really be classified as a business. What I'm talking about is people running gigs for the enjoyment of the experience or to use the stage time in order to improve their craft. Perhaps one day they might decide to go into business proper (in the sense of running a gig), in which case they would need to seek re-numeration, whether that be charging for tickets or handing around a bucket, but that's something quite separate from what I'm talking about.

I'm not sure how your FDR quote fits into all this except maybe to paint you as a man of moral fibre. Is there a point you were trying to make that I've missed?

I don't understand why you would not disclose them. I've outlined as clearly as possible what I think is right and what I think is wrong. And why. This is simple. And I'm willing to debate with anyone who can show me a flaw in my arguments what they are.

But if you can't even come up with a real life example that's a bit loony. After all if this practice is so successful and widespread why is it not commonplace and why can I not think of an example?

If it works and isn't just a theory there shouldn't be just one of them so you could cite several rather than single out an individual. You can't because these theoretical no profit bringer gigs are actually a chimera?

If anyone anywhere runs a gig without an idea of personal gain at the end of it in some form all I can say is they must indeed be extremely selfless.

"A business exists to make a profit"

Not that simple - the Coop and the John Lewis partnership are not for profit businesses.
This means the profits go to those that work there and there are not outside shareholders. I could argue Pear Shaped works along similar lines. There is a difference between "not-for-profit" and no one "making a profit" in the sense of being an outside investor who has no involvement in the day to day running but shares the financial risk. There are many many types of business model.
Treating something "as a business" does not automatically turn you into Lord Sugar.

Quote: Anthony Miller @ August 30 2011, 3:22 PM BST

I don't understand why you would not disclose them. I've outlined as clearly as possible what I think is right and what I think is wrong. And why. This is simple. And I'm willing to debate with anyone who can show me a flaw in my arguments what they are.

But if you can't even come up with a real life example that's a bit loony. After all if this practice is so successful and widespread why is it not commonplace and why can I not think of an example?

If it works and isn't just a theory there shouldn't be just one of them so you could cite several rather than single out an individual. You can't because these theoretical no profit bringer gigs are actually a chimera?

If anyone anywhere runs a gig without an idea of personal gain at the end of it in some form all I can say is they must indeed be extremely selfless.

View original

See, now you're just calling me a liar. Can you seriously not see why I wouldn't want to disclose someone else's name to a person who makes unfounded comments like that? You've already made unsubstantiated claims on this thread, personally naming people you theorise have it in for you - what's to say you won't do the same if I provide you with the information you're after? Stand-up can be an unfriendly game at the best of times without people taking others to task because they've had a personal spat and want to publicly drag a person's name through the mud over it.

Some people are just selfless, others promote free bringers as a stepping stone to the next stage of their comedy development. Some are in it for both reasons. So long as they don't charge me or the people I choose to bring along I have no qualm with them (not that I attend bringers myself anymore). The way I see it they're doing the open mic circuit a favour - giving acts who wouldn't usually draw an audience the opportunity to hone their skills in front of a decent crowd.

To my mind I've shown you plenty of flaws in your argument - maybe you're interested in hearing them because your mind's made up and you're too intent on being "right"? A hard line is hard to bend after all.

There may well be many truly selfless people in Entertainment and Stand-up.
I can't say that I have met them but do not totally dismiss the possibility that they may exist ...but I can't help thinking that if you are truly selfless being a stand up comedian is possibly the wrong vocation.
Working for charity or indeed devoting one's life to some kind of monastic order would seem to me to be "selfless" pursuits. Teaching, nursing maybe...?
But stand-ups, selfless? Seriously?

Standing in a spotlight and venting you individual views and jokes on the general public would seem to me to be the very inverse of selflessness.
I don't know that its selfish but it is certainly not selfless.

Where you draw your own personal lines is up to you ...but I do think one should attempt to draw a line somewhere......................

Too the best of my knowledge Bussell is one of them.

He runs a great night, doesn't charge an entrance usually and doesn't anyone to bring a friend or anything.

Quote: Anthony Miller @ August 30 2011, 3:52 PM BST

There may well be many truly selfless people in Entertainment and Stand-up.
I can't say that I have met them but do not totally dismiss the possibility that they may exist ...but I can't help thinking that if you are truly selfless being a stand up comedian is possibly the wrong vocation.
Working for charity or indeed devoting one's life to some kind of monastic order would seem to me to be "selfless" pursuits. Teaching, nursing maybe...?
But stand-ups, selfless? Seriously?

Standing in a spotlight and venting you individual views and jokes on the general public would seem to me to be the very inverse of selflessness.
I don't know that its selfish but it is certainly not selfless.

Where you draw your own personal lines is up to you ...but I do think one should attempt to draw a line somewhere......................

View original

I'm not talking about selflessness really though (if that's what you want to call it), I'm talking about a person who chooses to run a free comedy night to learn their trade or as a sideline to a more focused professional ambition. For example, a comedian working their way up the paid circuit who chooses to run a free night once a week to try out new material, improve their MC skills or just give a little back. That's not martyrdom but it's not profit orientated either. Why chastise that person just because he or she has a bringer policy? Is that the type of person you really want to wage a campaign against? I'm just suggesting a distinction that doesn't tar those people with the same brush you're using to paint the P2P folk.

In any case, as a promoter yourself there's a distinct conflict of interest at play that turns any argument you might have against a particular night or promoter into a personal issue. When I see one promoter publicly badmouthing another I find it hard to see any debate about ethics beyond simple professional rivalry. For the onlooker it becomes a question of who's side you want to take, and for me it's just a game I'd rather not play. I've seen what goes on over at Chortle - everyone comes off looking a bit silly, don't they?

Quote: sootyj @ August 30 2011, 3:57 PM BST

Too the best of my knowledge Bussell is one of them.

He runs a great night, doesn't charge an entrance usually and doesn't anyone to bring a friend or anything.

View original

Thanks, Sooty. To clarify, I do run a night, I don't demand acts bring guests, but I do occasionally charge for tickets (when I have a paid headliner and don't want to run at a loss).

I do that because I genuinely love doing it, I've made some great friends doing it, and I like to see an audience to have a good time. I don't always succeed of course - sometimes the audience just don't show in the numbers I'd like or the acts aren't so well received (myself included). Still, it's been a great way to learn what it takes to run a gig and get myself in front of a crowd on a regular basis. I work mainly with comedians a rung above the "open mic" circuit (meaning acts who've been at it 2 years+ and get paid work from time to time) but if I were to run a proper open mic I wouldn't think twice about making it a free bringer if it helped me get a decent crowd in. Budding comics always have the option to go elsewhere if they don't like it - and in this city there are plenty of places for them to play. Personally, when I was starting out, I'd much sooner take my girlfriend along to a free bringer with a full room than play in front of 4 other comics somewhere else.