Promoting in Aberdeen:

[Justin]

The youth of Aberdeen is where things should now be aimed at. Places having over 18s policies does nobody any favours. Yes I realise everyone has a business to run but more and more local youngsters are being pushed out the door, especially on weekends when this is the time of the week they have more time and money than the rest. School nights quickly affect gig attendance as does transport home, take the risk of these factors away i.e. allowed to attend gigs on weekends and they're more likely to go.

This is a situation happening in most cities just now not just Aberdeen.

In my opinion something has to be done. I'm not suggesting all pubs open their doors to unders but at least have somewhere like a town hall or Lemon Tree type venue that is willing to help out and take them off the streets

Yeh suppose you have a good point but the majority of the underagers will chance there luck at the bar and theres always one or two that slips through and manges to get served.

or theres the ones that get absolutly wrecked before they come and sneak there booze into the venue. so to any passer by the think the club/pub is serving younsters

also having underagers in means the bar isnt really making much money, so from the bars point of view there isnt really much point in underage gigs

[Inkster]

Yeh suppose you have a good point but the majority of the underagers will chance there luck at the bar and theres always one or two that slips through and manges to get served.

or theres the ones that get absolutly wrecked before they come and sneak there booze into the venue. so to any passer by the think the club/pub is serving younsters

also having underagers in means the bar isnt really making much money, so from the bars point of view there isnt really much point in underage gigs

So why bother putting posters in each others establishments etc to apparently "help the scene" but stifle the scene by having 18+ gigs?!

[Justin]

So why bother putting posters in each others establishments etc to apparently "help the scene" but stifle the scene by having 18+ gigs?!

i`m not speaking about "helping the scene" it will do alot more than putting up posters to "help the scene" am just replying to your question why venues try to avoid puting on underage gigs

[Inkster]

i`m not speaking about "helping the scene" it will do alot more than putting up posters to "help the scene" am just replying to your question why venues try to avoid puting on underage gigs

Yeah but I've heard it all before about money etc.

Fuck me, it mentions in this very thread about Stayover having a residency at The Moorings. This would never have been possible in my opinion had it been an 18+ policy.

Put yourself in the shoes of a 15/16/17 year old and your favourite band is coming to town but yet you can't go cos it's an 18+ gig and you can't afford to travel to the closest city to see them. It's a bit shit in my opinion.

[Justin]

Yeah but I've heard it all before about money etc.

Fuck me, it mentions in this very thread about Stayover having a residency at The Moorings. This would never have been possible in my opinion had it been an 18+ policy.

Put yourself in the shoes of a 15/16/17 year old and your favourite band is coming to town but yet you can't go cos it's an 18+ gig and you can't afford to travel to the closest city to see them. It's a bit shit in my opinion.

if you`ve heard it all before about money ect then you should understand. a venue has to make money.

pretty much every gig a high profile touring band play is 14+

and if the venue knows it will attracked alot of underagers the gig will most likely be 14+

[Flash@TMB]

Yeah but I've heard it all before about money etc.

Fuck me, it mentions in this very thread about Stayover having a residency at The Moorings. This would never have been possible in my opinion had it been an 18+ policy.

We tried it, there were too many negatives, we scrapped it.

Put yourself in the shoes of a 15/16/17 year old and your favourite band is coming to town but yet you can't go cos it's an 18+ gig and you can't afford to travel to the closest city to see them. It's a bit shit in my opinion.

The problem is the access to alcohol. We've experienced the situation where a kid collapses drunk despite being searched on entry, not being served, and having regular toilet checks. We then learn from it's mates that it necked a bottle of Sourz round the corner a few minutes before being admitted. The potential pitfalls are loss of license and going to jail on a manslaughter charge (hey but at least all the kids would think we were cool for a whole 5 mins). The only practical way to get around this would be to run a venue that did was not licensed to sell drink.

Umm how successful do you think that would be. Let's not kid (ho ho) ourselves. possible access to drink is half the attraction for under 18s going to gigs.

Fact is that most of these kids will later develop into adults and then be able to spend many years going to see bands and getting pished.

If anyone feels strongly about this then there's absolutely nothing to stop them from leasing one of the many vacant pubs and hosting gigs for children. Just contact Punch Taverns and ask for a new tenants information pack.

[Scootray]

I think these kids just have to accept that life isn't a bed of roses. Laws are in place. Fucking deal with it.

[Guest Exposure @ Lemon Tree]

I think these kids just have to accept that life isn't a bed of roses. Laws are in place. Fucking deal with it.

Yeah, I'm not saying every gig should be 14+ or that every venue should put on 14+. The promoter/venue will be aware of the appeal of a certain band etc etc and if it's worth putting it 14+ they will. But people have to accept Flash's comments regarding underagers getting themselves pished outside or sneaking drink in etc etc. Underagers will find a way to drink without getting served at the bar. Fuck me, I did it often enough!

When you're 14/15/16/whatever, you couldn't care less and are probably blissfully unaware of the consequences getting hammered underage can have on a bar owner etc. All you care about (massive generalisation...) is being cool/hard/getting a snog off some hotty in your year at school.

There's a time and a place for 14+ gigs, and as was said further up, most touring band gigs will be 14+.

Like I mentioned above, I will endeavour to compile a comprehensive list of Aberdeen gigs at MySpace.com - Aberdeen Gig Listings - UK - www.myspace.com/aberdeengiglistings and I will include on there whether it's a 14+ gig or an 18+ gig.

Cheers,

Calum

[Flash@TMB]

Yeah, I'm not saying every gig should be 14+ or that every venue should put on 14+. The promoter/venue will be aware of the appeal of a certain band etc etc and if it's worth putting it 14+ they will. But people have to accept Flash's comments regarding underagers getting themselves pished outside or sneaking drink in etc etc. Underagers will find a way to drink without getting served at the bar. Fuck me, I did it often enough!

When you're 14/15/16/whatever, you couldn't care less and are probably blissfully unaware of the consequences getting hammered underage can have on a bar owner etc. All you care about (massive generalisation...) is being cool/hard/getting a snog off some hotty in your year at school.

There's a time and a place for 14+ gigs, and as was said further up, most touring band gigs will be 14+.

Like I mentioned above, I will endeavour to compile a comprehensive list of Aberdeen gigs at MySpace.com - Aberdeen Gig Listings - UK - www.myspace.com/aberdeengiglistings and I will include on there whether it's a 14+ gig or an 18+ gig.

Cheers,

Calum

Good post

[Inkster]

Yeah, I'm not saying every gig should be 14+ or that every venue should put on 14+. The promoter/venue will be aware of the appeal of a certain band etc etc and if it's worth putting it 14+ they will. But people have to accept Flash's comments regarding underagers getting themselves pished outside or sneaking drink in etc etc. Underagers will find a way to drink without getting served at the bar. Fuck me, I did it often enough!

When you're 14/15/16/whatever, you couldn't care less and are probably blissfully unaware of the consequences getting hammered underage can have on a bar owner etc. All you care about (massive generalisation...) is being cool/hard/getting a snog off some hotty in your year at school.

There's a time and a place for 14+ gigs, and as was said further up, most touring band gigs will be 14+.

Like I mentioned above, I will endeavour to compile a comprehensive list of Aberdeen gigs at MySpace.com - Aberdeen Gig Listings - UK - www.myspace.com/aberdeengiglistings and I will include on there whether it's a 14+ gig or an 18+ gig.

Cheers,

Calum

I'm not disputing this fact. Most touring bands do get 14+ gigs but come fridays/saturdays and I (for example) phone up a venue asking for a date and get told it's 18+ at weekends then it makes it a lot harder to get a specific band to play in that city unless they play on a sunday-thursday night but this ultimately affects attendances due to school/work, buses home etc and then even if the gig does get booked the band have less people to play in front of and punters miss out cos they can't make the gig.

Said band then get a bit more recognised and come back to play somewhere like Moshulu and the punter then pays double the price they would've paid to see the same band at Drummonds and all those stories we have about seeing whatever band it is in Lava/Kef/East Neuk/Drummonds etc can't be said because they weren't allowed in or couldn't make it.

I'm probably waffling a lot now and I'll admit that but it's an issue I'd like to address at some point in the future and if anyone wants to help me then please PM your details and ideas.

[saf-one]

I'm not disputing this fact. Most touring bands do get 14+ gigs but come fridays/saturdays and I (for example) phone up a venue asking for a date and get told it's 18+ at weekends then it makes it a lot harder to get a specific band to play in that city unless they play on a sunday-thursday night but this ultimately affects attendances due to school/work, buses home etc and then even if the gig does get booked the band have less people to play in front of and punters miss out cos they can't make the gig.

Said band then get a bit more recognised and come back to play somewhere like Moshulu and the punter then pays double the price they would've paid to see the same band at Drummonds and all those stories we have about seeing whatever band it is in Lava/Kef/East Neuk/Drummonds etc can't be said because they weren't allowed in or couldn't make it.

I'm probably waffling a lot now and I'll admit that but it's an issue I'd like to address at some point in the future and if anyone wants to help me then please PM your details and ideas.

Dem are the breaks dude.

Veunes have to abide by the rules and do whats best for their business. There's no real financial benefit to a venue to let under 18s in. They cant buy drink (even if they could a 18+ with a FT job has more to spend) and its the promoter (unless its inhouse) who takes the door. It just the way it goes.

If your lookin to putting on gigs at a weekend & the usual options are a no go. Why not put them in a venue that doesn't sell booze?

.

[Cloud]

If your lookin to putting on gigs at a weekend & the usual options are a no go. Why not put them in a venue that doesn't sell booze?

Probably because then, the 'promoter' has to take the risk with getting a PA system, security, sound engineer, etc. And without a bar to cover at least some of these expenses, then ticket prices go up and the 'promoter' won't do it as it's too risky.

In my humble opinion, if you're relying on an underage crowd to make your gigs worthwhile, then you're either booking the wrong bands for the wrong city, or you don't know what you're doing.

Of course, this just goes to show that the amount of cash spent on bailing out the Lemon Tree is absolute nonsense and should've been spent on getting a couple of small venues off the ground.

[RF Scott]

In my humble opinion, if you're relying on an underage crowd to make your gigs worthwhile, then you're either booking the wrong bands for the wrong city, or you don't know what you're doing.

Fancy walking me through this one?

[Inkster]

Fancy walking me through this one?

I'm intrigued by what Cloud said to. Do explain.

[Flash@TMB]

Probably because then, the 'promoter' has to take the risk with getting a PA system, security, sound engineer, etc. And without a bar to cover at least some of these expenses, then ticket prices go up and the 'promoter' won't do it as it's too risky.

In my humble opinion, if you're relying on an underage crowd to make your gigs worthwhile, then you're either booking the wrong bands for the wrong city, or you don't know what you're doing.

That's a good grasp of the issue.

Of course, this just goes to show that the amount of cash spent on bailing out the Lemon Tree is absolute nonsense and should've been spent on getting a couple of small venues off the ground.

Another way of looking at this, is that the council was being supportive of younger people by subsiding gigs that would not otherwise have been economically viable.

I have no problem with that.

[saf-one]

Probably because then, the 'promoter' has to take the risk with getting a PA system, security, sound engineer, etc. And without a bar to cover at least some of these expenses, then ticket prices go up and the 'promoter' won't do it as it's too risky.

A promoter usually has to pay for all of these costs in the hire fee... and the venue takes the bar so makes no difference.

-

[Flash@TMB]

Probably because then, the 'promoter' has to take the risk with getting a PA system, security, sound engineer, etc. And without a bar to cover at least some of these expenses, then ticket prices go up and the 'promoter' won't do it as it's too risky.

A promoter usually has to pay for all of these costs in the hire fee... and the venue takes the bar so makes no difference.

We don't hit the promoter up for any of those things, and even subsidise the cost of the promo materials... but that's another (albeit minor) reason why letting people under 18 in doesn't appeal to us.

The promoter keeps the door charge, although if the door take is positive a little is syphoned off into a war chest to bail out under performing gates.

In my experience the door charge is at best enough to cover:

bands

ticket hatch person (if separate from promoter)

intra band DJ (if separate from promoter)

promoter

promotional material / tickets

Any additional costs like paying for PA, engineer, security, rider, accommodation, venue hire would likely double the ticket price, which in turn would reduce the number of punters, which would prevent the sums from adding up.

[Scootray]

Probably because then, the 'promoter' has to take the risk with getting a PA system, security, sound engineer, etc. And without a bar to cover at least some of these expenses, then ticket prices go up and the 'promoter' won't do it as it's too risky.

A promoter usually has to pay for all of these costs in the hire fee... and the venue takes the bar so makes no difference.

-

But really, a hire fee doesn't usually cost as much as those things combined. 50 to book The Tunnels? Surely PA hire, etc comes to more than 50.

[RF Scott]

Probably because then, the 'promoter' has to take the risk with getting a PA system, security, sound engineer, etc. And without a bar to cover at least some of these expenses, then ticket prices go up and the 'promoter' won't do it as it's too risky.

But really, a hire fee doesn't usually cost as much as those things combined. 50 to book The Tunnels? Surely PA hire, etc comes to more than 50.

The Tunnels doesn't hire it's own PA though.

[saf-one]

Yeah your right. Its rare to pay for the inhouse PA (but it does happen) and the Tunnels do offer a great hire deal at 50.

Some venues you have to pay for the lot eg Music Hall, Forum.

Thats clearly a different level of gig.

Moshulu & The Lemon Tree you pay for security and Sound dude as part of your hire fee.

[RF Scott]

Probably because then, the 'promoter' has to take the risk with getting a PA system, security, sound engineer, etc. And without a bar to cover at least some of these expenses, then ticket prices go up and the 'promoter' won't do it as it's too risky.

We don't hit the promoter up for any of those things, and even subsidise the cost of the promo materials... but that's another (albeit minor) reason why letting people under 18 in doesn't appeal to us.

The promoter keeps the door charge, although if the door take is positive a little is syphoned off into a war chest to bail out under performing gates.

In my experience the door charge is at best enough to cover:

bands

ticket hatch person (if separate from promoter)

intra band DJ (if separate from promoter)

promoter

promotional material / tickets

Any additional costs like paying for PA, engineer, security, rider, accommodation, venue hire would likely double the ticket price, which in turn would reduce the number of punters, which would prevent the sums from adding up.

So you don't charge the promoter anything and help with promotional costs? Good deal.

[saf-one]

So you don't charge the promoter anything and help with promotional costs? Good deal.

It does sound pretty good.

.

[Cloud]

A promoter usually has to pay for all of these costs in the hire fee... and the venue takes the bar so makes no difference.

What venues charge a fee that bears any relation to the cost incurred by the venue to stage the gig? For instance, Drummonds used to be free to hire, and the Tunnels would charge 50 quid on a weeknight. That 50 quid wouldn't even pay for the staffing, let alone the ongoing costs with the PA and so on. Hence the bar becomes responsible for making the profit for the venue - and which is ultimately why underage gigs cannot be a great proposition at the weekends for venues looking to pack the place out until 12/1/3am with drinkers.

Something else comes to mind about weekends - okay, a venue may allow underagers in until 11. But the likelihood is that the vast majority of adults out for a drink and a good time that might consider some music won't be interested if they look in and see the place full of kids - they'll just go elsewhere. Then consider the fact that the police will 'have a word' if vast amounts of kids are hanging around outside, and they rapidly become a pest to a venue.

Flash has made plenty of posts in the past outlining exactly why they stopped doing 14+ gigs at The Moorings - and I dare say most venues will feel the same way at the weekends. The fact that these venues are happy to take on 14+ gigs midweek should be seen as a good thing, as it would be all too easy for them to move to a 18+ policy.

Fancy walking me through this one?

Certainly.

Any promoter with half a brain should realise that people, generally, will look to the weekend for their entertainment. Students are an exception - but seeing as adult gig goers comprise a wide section of society, then there's little point focusing on them above everyone else. Therefore, if you need underagers at the weekend to make your gigs viable, you're simply booking the wrong bands for the city - you should be booking the bands that bring in drinkers, which keeps the venues happy to keep putting on gigs. People seem to forget that these venues are businesses too - and if anything, it's more important that they make a profit (or at least, make an acceptable loss in the eyes of the owners) than the individual promoters.

Likewise, relying on underagers to fill a gig is a classic sign of someone not knowing what they're doing as they need the (easily satisfied) underage market in order to make their gigs successful. It's no great secret that you can make any gig successful just by sticking on a couple of support bands that draw vast amounts of kids - but it's hardly a success for a venue if their place is at capacity with kids, leaving no room for people who will actually stay and drink all night.

I think, at least personally, promoting to underagers is simply a lazy option - it's much, much harder to promote to adults, and as such, perhaps such 'promoters' that put on gigs aimed at the youth market should consider that rightfully or wrongly, the best place for such gigs are during the week.

Of course - to someone such as Inkster. Have you considered approaching the venues with a plan that you'll take responsibility for the actions of the kids at the weekend? An earlier start/finish, combined with an assurance that you'll take full responsibility in making sure that the venue is cleaned out of kids by a certain time might be taken seriously. If you had people deployed to catch such nonsense as drinking anywhere near the venue/in the venue, compulsory bag searches/taking any sort of bottles off them and proving that you will actually police the gig thoroughly, they may be more willing to take you on.

The final word on the matter for now - I think personally, underagers are a great way to sell out a gig. If you stick on two/three supports, all of whom have loads of mates and will sell loads of tickets, then you're probably onto a winner and can afford to pay the headliner a bit over their guarantee, which is always a nice gesture to make.

But it's probably bad news for a venue, especially considering the amount of things that can happen. It's probably an acceptable risk during the week, however.

[Flash@TMB]

So you don't charge the promoter anything and help with promotional costs? Good deal.

If a promoter was to put on a gig in an unequipped venue and swing for ALL the associated costs then I'd expect them to be seeking a cut of the bar take. That's how we used to work it, years ago, before we had a PA. You see in that instance the promoter would be taking all the risk and the bar would be seeing all the upside. You need to strike a balance that works for all parties, and that will vary from venue to venue.

[Flash@TMB]

Of course - to someone such as Inkster. Have you considered approaching the venues with a plan that you'll take responsibility for the actions of the kids at the weekend? An earlier start/finish, combined with an assurance that you'll take full responsibility in making sure that the venue is cleaned out of kids by a certain time might be taken seriously. If you had people deployed to catch such nonsense as drinking anywhere near the venue/in the venue, compulsory bag searches/taking any sort of bottles off them and proving that you will actually police the gig thoroughly, they may be more willing to take you on.

That's a nice idea but unfortunately the venue is still liable to the authorities if anything goes wrong, and though your plan looks good on paper it wouldn't wash in front of an angry licensing board.

The best way to accomplish this is to hire a church hall or a scout hut. Let people bring their own booze. If it all goes tits up then you can abscond. Nobody is going to indite a man of the cloth.