From: bbehlen@soda.berkeley.edu (Vitamin B (Brian Behlendorf))
Newsgroups: alt.rave
Subject: Re: Somebody has to pay
Date: 14 Sep 1992 00:03:04 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu

In article <190783INNpq8@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> tripstr@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Christopher Todd Courtois) writes:
>	I think it's a real shame that Richard Sun lost money on
>	IMagiNation.  It was a terrific show, with some of the
>	best DJs, visuals, space, etc.  

I want to second this.  IMagiNation was very creative and very unique...

>	Richard put a lot of work
>	into this and the place was nearly packed and yet they still	
>	lost money.  The explanation:  there were too many people
>	on the "crew" list. 
>
>	This is ridiculous, folks. It's one thing to get in free
>	to a rave when you're setting up significant equipment, working
>	security/safety, etc. and something entirely different to get
>	in free because you're a friend of a friend of a friend who
>	*might* bring some gear.
>
>	Richard was asking for $10 at the door, which was a perfectly
>	reasonable for a 9 hour rave, especially with the fantastic 
>	setup he had. 

	In full agreement here.  You often wonder why you hear about big
raves with thousands of people, supposedly all paying $20 to get in, and the
promoters complaining because they're losing money.  I don't know of any 
promoter here in SF who's rolling in money, and yet you'd think that any
organization that grosses twenty grand every few weeks would have a few
wealthy people.  The reason is:  most promoters _aren't_ business people.
Many try to be, and the few who are reasonably successful try to be as
businesslike as possible, but many simply have no concept of money.  They
don't realize that putting 50 people on the guest list means $1000 out of 
their pocket.  They don't realize that getting insurance for a site and getting
the proper (and usually not too expensive) permits for a site is far cheaper
than getting busted and losing the revenue.  I mean, it would have been
impossible for me to break anywhere near even if SFRavers had been told they 
didn't have to worry about contributing at Connection (the rave we threw).
I had no problem asking my best friends for money (and they, in turn, really
had no qualms about giving.)

	Raves shouldn't have to cost more than $10, no matter what.  If you
know what you're doing, and you don't get allured by the almighty dollar,
then you'll be able to throw a great party.  

	The flip side of the issue, of course, are the people who expect to
be able to get into a club for free "because they know people".  This has 
_always_ annoyed me.  If the event you are throwing is fun, people should
have no problem in paying the amount, or in helping set up/tear down/provide
security and logistics, etc.  By catering to those people you simply feed
their greed, to the point where they _won't_ come if you don't let them in
for free.  This becomes a problem if those people are your "hardcore" crowd,
who you want in there anyways to enliven the party.  So basically, don't do
it from the start.

	This weekend we held a rave in Golden Gate Park - it was a combination
of about 12 promoter groups, all of whom contributed $50 to get the permits
needed for the site.  It would have been impossible for us to charge admission
since it was a public site and open on all sides.  So instead, myself, about
5 other SFRavers, and a few of the promoters went around all afternoon asking
people to help contribute. (The charities were the Rainforest Action Network,
and the Burt Center for Abused and Battered Children).  We collected $1470 for
the charities, from about 400-500 people gathered at the site (and some of the
biggest contributors didn't even know anything about raves, but wanted to 
help anyways 'coz they liked the idea.)  I think the main selling point in
all this:  those of us organizing it weren't doing it to line our pocketbooks,
and the people there picked up on this.

	So what is the answer, In My Humble Opinion?  Rave promoters shouldn't
throw parties for profit.  I'm going to get a lot of flames for this, but hear
me out:

	First off, it doesn't take TOO much effort to throw an event, if you
know how to coordinate things and have a strong core of people willing to help
(who also aren't into it for the money).  You should be able to do it and hold
a 9-5 M-F job (with the provision that you can get a day or two off every now
and then - computer science is ideal for this!!! :)  

	Two, people are much more willing to work with you and trust you if
they know that you aren't into it for the money, and if you are willing to
open your accounting books for them.

	Three, there are things you _must_ pay:

	  1) of course, anything that has a price set: video equipment rental,
sound system, site, etc.

	  2) people who provide some of these services for a living: such as
lighting guys, DJ's etc.  Hey, I know as much as the next person that these
guys/gals gotta eat and pay for their equipment.   
	    2.1: If you tell them that you're thowing the event as a free or
ultra-low-cost affair, they'll be more willing to work for less, or maybe
even free.  Most of the starting DJ's and small lighting groups know that
their main point in playing should first be to make a name, and then to get
paid.  Tell them you'll pay them whatever you make after expenses.  Even the
best DJ's here in SF will DJ for free for the right events (the GG Park
thing, a Full Moon Rave, Sunday-afternoon-on-the-beach events, etc.)

	Four:  it's next to impossible to make as much money as a promoter
as you would make doing a "real" job,  without hurting the scene itself.  
We've all heard about the big huge raves-to-end-all-raves that LA sees often
and that have been creeping into SF as well (and in other cities, from what
I can tell).  If the promoter's interested in money, he's not going to worry
about such things as having a couple of EMT's around in case someone needs
help, or in having enough toilets, or in providing more than the bare minimum
of lighting he can get away with, or... or... his main concern is in getting
thousands of people in there, paying, buying drinks, etc.  I mean, if its his
livelihood, then its understandable. But when its our $20, then, well...
If the promoters are interested in profit, you get ToonTown, which has been
much maligned on the SFRaves list.  

	Conclusion: the promoters should do it as a hobby, nothing more.
They should do it for the thrill of having 1000 people all moving to the
same beat and loving the experience, not because 1000 people are each paying
$20 and that means you'll be able to make that downpayment on that Porsche
you've been eyeing.  Every event that I've ever thrown or helped throw has
been non-profit.  I only broke even on the first because people from the 
SFRaves helped, even weeks after the event.  And even if I hadn't broken
event, I wouldn't have minded losing $100 or $200 if that meant I could
throw a great event.  As for the DJ's, I think they should do it as a hobby
too, but I know that buying the music is VERY expensive for the DJ's who
need the new stuff every week, so I think paying them 200-300 for an event 
is entirely reasonable.  Paying them sufficiently for official events will
make them more willing to DJ for you if you want to have an afternoon beach
rave for free.

>	The real tragedy of this is that there probably won't be a
>	rave as good as IMagiNation in the SF bay area in the near future.
>	And if there is, you can bet it'll cost a lot more.

	Well, let's have another one soon that *won't* cost more!

	Connection 2 location suggestions now being accepted...

	Brian

p.s. - this has been cross-posted, along with tripstr's original article, to
sfraves.

Newsgroups: alt.rave