»

[Flash@TMB]

Originally Posted by Elwood Cobra Kai

Perhaps you should consider getting Sky and doing big steaks in the Moorings. I too love football and big steaks! Or a nice Tikka masala, like in the Tilted wig

The Tilted Wig and Moorings have almost identical floor area. The main difference being that the Wig's toilet block is located at the rear and ours is located on the right hand side.

Due to size constraints we had the choice between a kitchen and a stage:

We fitted a stage, a PA, and a lighting rig.

The Wig fitted a kitchen, a sink, and a microwave.

If you want food other than crisps or a toastie then you'll have to go elsewhere. The Tunnels does nice food though and it's independent

[Flash@TMB]

Originally Posted by RF Scott

People like sport, though...

There's nothing wrong with liking sport or red meat.

Lots of chain bars have signs outside offering Big Steaks and Big Screen Sport. These are like standard fitments. If you like those things then you have something like 250 outlets to choose from. But would you prefer it if EVERYWHERE was exactly the same?

Originally Posted by RF Scott

Are you trying to say that people should be going along to gigs at the Moorings for the sake of it, or something? I'm not sure what you're trying to get across.

The concept was that if someone would like for small venues to stay open, then they should support them. Chain's tend not to support grass roots music because there's less money in it, and the costs are much higher compared with serving BIG steaks and Sky football. Which is why so many small venues are lost.

Unfortunately there's no danger of losing a Wetherspoons.

[RF Scott]

Originally Posted by Flash@TMB

The concept was that if someone would like for small venues to stay open, then they should support them. Chain's tend not to support grass roots music because there's less money in it, and the costs are much higher compared with serving BIG steaks and Sky football. Which is why so many small venues are lost.

Unfortunately there's no danger of losing a Wetherspoons.

But in your post you seemed to have a problem with people who only go to small venues when they are playing a gig/their friends are - surely that's supporting them, even if not to the extent as other people?

[Flash@TMB]

Originally Posted by RF Scott

But in your post you seemed to have a problem with people who only go to small venues when they are playing a gig/their friends are - surely that's supporting them, even if not to the extent as other people?

The costs involved in hosting original live music are very high when compared with the alternatives. Any venue will tell you that they would do much better to put on a DJ, a karaoke, show football, or even no entertainment whatsoever. Many venues use their clubnights to subsidise their live music.

In our case we also supply the musicians with cost price drink all night, so there are no bar profits from their presence.

So can playing a gig really be classed as supporting the venue???

Most people will have experienced the nightmare scenario where there are 4 bands booked to play. The only people that show up are 3 of the bands and a handful of mates. After each band plays it departs along with it's mates. Eventually the 'headliners', usually an out of town band, take the stage and play to nobody. Of course everyone wants paid, so venue foots the bill for that along with the sound engineer, extra bar staff, door staff, ticket hatch person, and heat, light, power. OUCH!

If everyone's support extended only to playing a gig for money, then very quickly there would be no venues left. Geddit?

[RF Scott]

Originally Posted by Flash@TMB

The costs involved in hosting original live music are very high when compared with the alternatives. Any venue will tell you that they would do much better to put on a DJ, a karaoke, show football, or even no entertainment whatsoever. Many venues use their clubnights to subsidise their live music.

In our case we also supply the musicians with cost price drink all night, so there are no bar profits from their presence.

So can playing a gig really be classed as supporting the venue???

Most people will have experienced the nightmare scenario where there are 4 bands booked to play. The only people that show up are 3 of the bands and a handful of mates. After each band plays it departs along with it's mates. Eventually the 'headliners', usually an out of town band, take the stage and play to nobody. Of course everyone wants paid, so venue foots the bill for that along with the sound engineer, extra bar staff, door staff, ticket hatch person, and heat, light, power. OUCH!

If everyone's support extended only to playing a gig for money, then very quickly there would be no venues left. Geddit?

Well, yeah it still is supporting the venue, really, as they are there. In the venue. They could easily be somewhere else, and I'm sure it's a lot better to have someone in a place drinking cost price drinks than having nobody there at all, especially for passers by (who wants to go to an empty pub where there are bands playing? Talk about awkward).

As for the bands leaving after their set et al, I find that this nearly always happens with thrown-together bills, as opposed to well thought out and promoted nights. I struggle to think of the last gig I went to, where the other bands playing left before the headliner, whether the show was busy or not. Also, with most venues, paying the bands is the promoter's responsibility rather than the venue. Sure, it's very nice of you to do so (I'm assuming that you do this considering you are using it as an example), but it's not like you're expected to (I'd be surprised if it happened to me), so as it's the exception rather than the rule, it doesn't really count in this argument. Same goes for the cost price drinks, in fact - if you are playing at a venue with an outside promoter in, and are buying drinks from the bar, you're putting money into the venue.


(Obviously I'm not complaining that bars/venues do pay out of their pocket in cases).

[stuartmaxwell]

book swordmaster and all of your woes will evapourate into a smile

[RodThunder]

i concur

[Flash@TMB]

Originally Posted by RF Scott

Well, yeah it still is supporting the venue, really, as they are there. In the venue. They could easily be somewhere else...

Your original ascertion was that merely playing a gig for money could somehow be construed as supporting the venue. The example was cited to highlight what would happen if everyone only offered their support in that way.

Even paying full price, a band does not drink enough to cover the costs of enabling it to play. Under those circumstances a venue would be better of closing it's doors.

As someone lots of business experience and fairly good grasp of economics, P&L etc... please just trust me on this one - OK?

[RF Scott]

Originally Posted by Flash@TMB

Your original ascertion was that merely playing a gig for money could somehow be construed as supporting the venue. The example was cited to highlight what would happen if everyone only offered their support in that way.

Even paying full price, a band does not drink enough to cover the costs of enabling it to play. Under those circumstances a venue would be better of closing it's doors.

As someone lots of business experience and fairly good grasp of economics, P&L etc... please just trust me on this one - OK?

To be fair, I never mentioned anything about playing a gig for money that the venue is paying out. I'm not saying that a band would cover the costs, just that buying drinks is supporting the venue.

[Flash@TMB]

Originally Posted by RF Scott

To be fair, I never mentioned anything about playing a gig for money that the venue is paying out. I'm not saying that a band would cover the costs, just that buying drinks is supporting the venue.

You mean as opposed to bringing your own booze, or drinking in the Wetherspoons across the street between sets?

On behalf of all small venues: Cheers mate! We appreciate your heartfelt support. See you next booking