Lemon Tree No More???

[Cloud]

I could be completely wrong in this, but I didn't think the Arts Centre was anything to do with the council anymore? Not sure what the exact set up is, some sort of trust perhaps. It's certainly not Aberdeen Performing Arts.

It wouldn't surprise me if there was a huge difference between the two setups, unfortunately But you would think that there would be joined up thinking - and that the relevant funding bodies would see fit to force the two together. It's completely and utterly illogical to have the Lemon Tree running completely seperate to the Arts Centre, after all.

Tolerate? What are they going to do?

It's incredibly complex, but basically, there may very well be issues if the publicly funded Lemon Tree goes head to head with a privately owned Moshulu for the same audience. It depends on so much, but it wouldn't be a surprise if a condition of their funding was to not directly compete with private business.

[Stichman]

em, no. the condiments have split up. quite a while ago.

or they better have, cos the guitarist is now in my band and we have a show the same day

Really? Didn't they just release an album on Foyer Records?

[Angusr]

Really? Didn't they just release an album on Foyer Records?

Yes, that's correct.

They played their last gig at the Tunnels before the CD was released.

The reason for them splitting up is that one of the band members is moving away from Aberdeen.

[framheim]

It's incredibly complex, but basically, there may very well be issues if the publicly funded Lemon Tree goes head to head with a privately owned Moshulu for the same audience. It depends on so much, but it wouldn't be a surprise if a condition of their funding was to not directly compete with private business.

eh? surely just by opening their doors they're competing. get a grip min. why would they not be allowed to compete with private business? should the bbc not compete with itv and sky for tv audiences, actors, writers, producers and other talent?

i like how you've dodged the complete rubbishness of your statement by saying "it's incredibly complex".

*gets comfy in seat and assumes optimum listening position*

i'm all ears, prey tell, how is this incredibly complex and on what does it depend?

[Lemonade]

eh? surely just by opening their doors they're competing. get a grip min. why would they not be allowed to compete with private business? should the bbc not compete with itv and sky for tv audiences, actors, writers, producers and other talent?

i like how you've dodged the complete rubbishness of your statement by saying "it's incredibly complex".

*gets comfy in seat and assumes optimum listening position*

i'm all ears, prey tell, how is this incredibly complex and on what does it depend?

I'm sure he will explain, but your teeny tiny brain may not be able to understand the complexity of it

[Bigsby]

eh? surely just by opening their doors they're competing. get a grip min. why would they not be allowed to compete with private business? should the bbc not compete with itv and sky for tv audiences, actors, writers, producers and other talent?

i like how you've dodged the complete rubbishness of your statement by saying "it's incredibly complex".

*gets comfy in seat and assumes optimum listening position*

i'm all ears, prey tell, how is this incredibly complex and on what does it depend?

lol, my thoughts exactly. I can't wait to hear Cloud's explanation. The words "Monopolies and Mergers Commission" may be involved.

For what it's worth, other businesses have moaned for years about The Lemon Tree's subsidised status, Flash for one complained about it on here quite a lot.

[lovers_spit]

Yes, that's correct.

They played their last gig at the Tunnels before the CD was released.

The reason for them splitting up is that one of the band members is moving away from Aberdeen.

3 out of the 4 band members are moving to the burgh.

Yeah they had an EP on foyer released after the split. Fucking good record, shame to see them go.

[Cloud]

eh? surely just by opening their doors they're competing. get a grip min. why would they not be allowed to compete with private business? should the bbc not compete with itv and sky for tv audiences, actors, writers, producers and other talent?

i like how you've dodged the complete rubbishness of your statement by saying "it's incredibly complex".

*gets comfy in seat and assumes optimum listening position*

i'm all ears, prey tell, how is this incredibly complex and on what does it depend?

Okay, the big case at the minute is in shipping - with the EU investigating the subsidies given to CalMac. I'm not sure how far back the investigation is going, but the core case revolves round them being given subsidises despite being publicly owned (CalMac, in both current and previous guises is ultimately owned by Scotland, it's the last great nationalised industry in some respects).

On one of the CalMac routes, they have been competiting directly against a private concern in Western Ferries for a long time now - and quite a few people have been arguing against this, particularly as they're being subsidised to over 2 million a year on the one route alone. It's also being argued that as the Scottish Government (and the Executive, and the Scottish Office before that) is funding routes, there's no opportunity for a private operator to actually come in.

There's also a current issue in Poland concerning state aid being given to their historically important shipyards in Gdansk - I'm not too sure what the latest move is, but last week, the EU demanded that Poland either come up with a viable plan for the future, or get repayment of the subsidies given to the shipyards. This is partially because the shipyards have no hope (unless drastically restructed, something that would be massively unpopular in Poland..given the rise of Solidarity from a shipyard, you just don't mess with them) of ever operating on a fair playing field with the rest of the EU.

There's countless other examples recently - Alitalia are another example of a high profile industry that has suffered quite badly under the pretty strict rules on state aid.

Now, fair enough, the Lemon Tree is a far smaller fish - but the same principle still applies. A useful link is here - EUROPA - European Commission - Competition

It takes some digging around on the internet to actually find relevant parts, but one example from the Europa site is this..

As a first step, it has to determine if a company has received State aid, which is the case if the support meets the following criteria:

1. there has been an intervention by the State or through State resources which can take a variety of forms (e.g. grants, interest and tax reliefs, guarantees, government holdings of all or part of a company, or the provision of goods and services on preferential terms, etc.),

2. the intervention is likely to affect trade between Member States,

3. the intervention confers an advantage to the recipient on a selective basis, for example to specific companies or sectors of the industry, or to companies located in specific regions,

4. competition has been or may be distorted.

The only criteria in which it falls down is the 2nd one - but further reading seems to suggest that the defintion of 'trade between Member States' is rather loose and can be applied in a rather flexible way.

Now...take the situation with the Lemon Tree. If it's receiving a public grant (from whoever), and using it to programme commercial, popular music on a regular basis (let's say for the sake of argument, it's doing so 4 times a week), from which Moshulu suffers because they haven't got the subsidies to do so, then it's distorting competition. We could be here all day debating it - but the principle is that they were (and likely still are) receiving state aid in order to open their doors. The test though, is in how much they compete with other venues.

As you said, by opening their doors, they're competing. That's not the point - they're not competiting on a fair and level playing field, if the Lemon Tree is receiving subsidises to do the same thing.

Would you be terribly happy if someone was battling for your business as a photographer, but who got several thousand pounds to buy the latest equipment that you couldn't afford? Or, say Hog knew someone and got given 10,000 from the State in order to open a new studio. All fine and well, but then you discover that he's actually using the studio for commercial purposes, and competiting directly with your own studio. You can't afford to kit out your studio in the same way he can, and he's only doing the occasional thing for the public benefit, the rest of the time is for commercial gain. It's the same principle - public money should not be used to distort competition in the marketplace.

The BBC is a strange example, I suspect that because the nature of public broadcasting is/was engrained in Europe, the EU haven't actually done anything about it. Seemingly the right to public broadcasting has been enshrined in the Treaty of Amsterdam as being a matter left to the national governments, but I'm writing this quickly. There's what appears to be an interesting webpage at State aid law and the BBC - Reckon Open though.

I do remeber there being murmurings that the licence fee should be spread out equally, but the BBC was somewhat vicious in their demands that they keep all of it. I'm not clued up on it, though.

[stuartmaxwell]

what is the charity status of the organisation in question? are they not for profit ltd business? i.e reinvest revenue for the purpose of serving their client group or achieving their objectives

[soundian]

Several points Cloud, dunno if you have the answers to them at your pedantic little fingertips but here goes:

1) Is the new Lemon Tree receiving funding?

2) Are there any caveats attached to any funding, such as restricting usage of funds to theatre or suchlike?

3) Last time I checked, Aberdeen City was not a state so any funding from them wouldn't come under the legislation quoted above.

4) Any state funding would come from the arts council wouldn't it, I'm sure moshulu are perfectly within their rights to apply for grants from them as well.

While I'm here:

I think people are being a bit quick to jump on the programming, most bands of the size that could sell-out the LT have their tours booked months in advance so even if they started sourcing acts in April you wouldn't really see the benefits of it until at least October.

I'd give them until next spring before gathering the frenzied mob complete with burning torches and pitchforks myself cos jan and feb are a bit quiet tourwise.

That's my 2p's worth on the subject.

[framheim]

Okay, the big case at the minute is in shipping... *google* blah blah blah... tenuous link back to my job...blah blah

Some fair points there though I don't think the Calmac comparison is viable given that the government is surely under some obligation to provide subsidies to Calmac in order to keep vital ferry services afloat. They may be competing with Western Ferries on more commercially viable routes but I doubt they have much competition on the majority of their routes which undoubtably would lose a hella lot of money outside of tourist season but which are vital to the health and well being of the western isles.

The funding Lemon Tree receives normally is earmarked for certain uses if i remember correctly. So if ACC gives them a large sum of money it's on the understanding it is used for community arts projects or education not for booking commercial touring acts. You could argue that this money helps raise the profile of the Lemon Tree but that would be picky.

As for the camera and studio analogy. There are plenty of grants available for photography equipment if you need funding for a specific project. Once that project is completed there is nothing stopping you from pursuing a more commercial career.

Anyhoo, why don't you go tip the EU off about the Lemon Tree and then we'll find out where they stand.

[Cloud]

Several points Cloud, dunno if you have the answers to them at your pedantic little fingertips but here goes:

1) Is the new Lemon Tree receiving funding?

I would be very, very surprised to learn that there wasn't some sort of subsidy involved - even if it's just free rent of the building. Given the programme they're following, there must be some sort of subsidy somewhere - though it may not be as clear cut as the council handing them a large chunk of cash.

2) Are there any caveats attached to any funding, such as restricting usage of funds to theatre or suchlike?

Good question, and it's one I'd like to know myself. Might be worth a Freedom of Information request to the council to find out the exact details, actually.

3) Last time I checked, Aberdeen City was not a state so any funding from them wouldn't come under the legislation quoted above.

I'm not 100% on this, but I think you're wrong on the above. If being a state was the requirement, then why would CalMac be investigated when Scotland isn't a state either? I'm fairly sure by "state", it effectively means "public".

4) Any state funding would come from the arts council wouldn't it, I'm sure moshulu are perfectly within their rights to apply for grants from them as well.

That means nothing - as no two venues are the same. If subsidies are to be offered, then they have to be offered to all - see Ryanair and Charleroi for an example where a subsidy was given to one, and later withdrawn after being declared illegal.

[Cloud]

Some fair points there though I don't think the Calmac comparison is viable given that the government is surely under some obligation to provide subsidies to Calmac in order to keep vital ferry services afloat. They may be competing with Western Ferries on more commercially viable routes but I doubt they have much competition on the majority of their routes which undoubtably would lose a hella lot of money outside of tourist season but which are vital to the health and well being of the western isles.

Of course - I completely agree with what you've said. I think it's personally ridiculous that the EU is even investigating - fair enough, the Gourock-Dunoon service should be examined, but the rest of them should be left well alone. It's been well documented that there wasn't even a need to go to tender under the Altmark ruling - but that's a case for the now-thankfully ex-Executive.

The CalMac situation is relevant, though, as they do present a barrier for new business to enter. Pentland Ferries have managed it to succeed (more than succeed in some respect!) against CalMac-owned Northlink, without subsidy - so there is a world of arguments over whether or not something should continue to be subsidised if there's a private operator willing to cover the same ground.

The funding Lemon Tree receives normally is earmarked for certain uses if i remember correctly. So if ACC gives them a large sum of money it's on the understanding it is used for community arts projects or education not for booking commercial touring acts. You could argue that this money helps raise the profile of the Lemon Tree but that would be picky.

Yep - but this is what I'm saying, it may be that the funding arrangements are stopping them from persuing a more commercial line up. Of course, it's absolutely unlikely that anyone is going to kick up a fuss if the Lemon Tree persues a path like that with the occasional popular gig - but of course, then you get people moaning about the same old, same old.

It would be interesting to find out exactly how the Lemon Tree is being funded now

Anyhoo, why don't you go tip the EU off about the Lemon Tree and then we'll find out where they stand.

I'm sure the Barfly are capable of doing that themselves if they feel the need

[soundian]

I would be very, very surprised to learn that there wasn't some sort of subsidy involved - even if it's just free rent of the building. Given the programme they're following, there must be some sort of subsidy somewhere - though it may not be as clear cut as the council handing them a large chunk of cash.

Good question, and it's one I'd like to know myself. Might be worth a Freedom of Information request to the council to find out the exact details, actually.

I'm not 100% on this, but I think you're wrong on the above. If being a state was the requirement, then why would CalMac be investigated when Scotland isn't a state either? I'm fairly sure by "state", it effectively means "public".

That means nothing - as no two venues are the same. If subsidies are to be offered, then they have to be offered to all - see Ryanair and Charleroi for an example where a subsidy was given to one, and later withdrawn after being declared illegal.

So what you're saying is: you don't know if there is any funding and even if you did, you don't know what the funding might be for therefore it's pure speculation on your part as to whether the Barfly is facing unfair competition.

[Cloud]

what is the charity status of the organisation in question? are they not for profit ltd business? i.e reinvest revenue for the purpose of serving their client group or achieving their objectives

A quick look on the OSCR says this....

Advancement of Education

Advancement of the Arts' date=' Heritage, Culture or Science [/quote']

If the building is ran by the charity directly, then there would be a very valid complaint to be made if they were using charity status in order to promote commercial events on a level expected by some people. I suspect the charity status will be one reason that we'll never see it as a 'proper' music venue.

It's pretty interesting stuff when you get into it.

[Cloud]

So what you're saying is: you don't know if there is any funding and even if you did, you don't know what the funding might be for therefore it's pure speculation on your part as to whether the Barfly is facing unfair competition.

Well, considering that no private operators came forward to take the place on, that the rescue came from Aberdeen Performing Arts, which just so happens to receive a rather big grant each year from the council, and that the place has previously only stayed open with public funding...I'd think it was a pretty surefire bet that the place is being subsidised in some way.

Common sense would tell you that, if nothing else.

[soundian]

Well, considering that no private operators came forward to take the place on, that the rescue came from Aberdeen Performing Arts, which just so happens to receive a rather big grant each year from the council, and that the place has previously only stayed open with public funding...I'd think it was a pretty surefire bet that the place is being subsidised in some way.

Common sense would tell you that, if nothing else.

Common sense tells me that they are unlikely to get 100% funding for anything so will be required to make a profit from their commercial activities to make up the shortfall in any arts/community projects and their funding will quite possibly be dependent on them making that money. That sort puts them in a worse situation than the barfly cos they could break even and not worry(too much) whereas the LT might have to make a profit competing in the same market.

Although, like you, I'm just speculating with no access to facts.

[Cloud]

Common sense tells me that they are unlikely to get 100% funding for anything so will be required to make a profit from their commercial activities to make up the shortfall in any arts/community projects and their funding will quite possibly be dependent on them making that money. That sort puts them in a worse situation than the barfly cos they could break even and not worry(too much) whereas the LT might have to make a profit competing in the same market.

Although, like you, I'm just speculating with no access to facts.

This article would seem to confirm that there's grant funding involved.

City council paves way for trust to revive the Lemon Tree

This also confirms that SAC are funding the venue to the tune of 80,000 a year..

The Lemon Tree: 13 Mar 2008: Scottish Parliament debates (TheyWorkForYou.com)

Like has been said, there's probably restrictions on the use of the money, which explains why it's 'more of the same'.

[soundian]

This article would seem to confirm that there's grant funding involved.

City council paves way for trust to revive the Lemon Tree

This also confirms that SAC are funding the venue to the tune of 80,000 a year..

The Lemon Tree: 13 Mar 2008: Scottish Parliament debates (TheyWorkForYou.com)

Like has been said, there's probably restrictions on the use of the money, which explains why it's 'more of the same'.

Maybe it's "more of the same" as far as booking goes because they still don't (or have they recently?) got a new booking manager. As I explained, it will take months for this to show any effects in their advertising anyway cos most bands who play at a "national/international' level book many months in advance.

And SAC funding is there for the asking, if Moshulu did similar arts ventures I'm sure the SAC would treat their applications (it's not just given to them you know, they have to apply) with the same procedures they apply to every application.

As for the link to ACC, that tells you nothing. The grant could be 1, 5000 or shedloads. The lease and service arrangements could be comparable to current market rates for all you know.

Waht does it matter to you anyway, you're a student in Essex. You probably don't even pay council tax there, never mind here where the money's coming from!

[Jim Stax]

This article would seem to confirm that there's grant funding involved.

City council paves way for trust to revive the Lemon Tree

This also confirms that SAC are funding the venue to the tune of 80,000 a year..

The Lemon Tree: 13 Mar 2008: Scottish Parliament debates (TheyWorkForYou.com)

Like has been said, there's probably restrictions on the use of the money, which explains why it's 'more of the same'.

What different was it supposed to be doing at this stage? As has been stated elsewhere they have put a full time music programmer in place yet and I believe this may be a few months away and from what I can see the theater/drama side of things has a lot more presence than it did. We are sometime away from the full music programme and there is no way we should be judging just yet, if at all... The important factor was getting the venue open as soon as possible so that it could start to turn over some cash and this is happening.

[AIYF]

I guess you have all seen this?

The Stage / News / MacPherson named as Lemon Tree's artistic director

[Jim Stax]

I guess you have all seen this?

The Stage / News / MacPherson named as Lemon Tree's artistic director

Music Programmer to follow soon perhaps...

[soundian]

I guess you have all seen this?

The Stage / News / MacPherson named as Lemon Tree's artistic director

You guess wrong. Good stuff, it needs someone to take it by the scruff of the neck, give it a good shake and see if it's potential is still there.

[Chris]

I'm not clued up on it, though.

Most honest thing you've said in a long time.

[Cloud]

Maybe it's "more of the same" as far as booking goes because they still don't (or have they recently?) got a new booking manager. As I explained, it will take months for this to show any effects in their advertising anyway cos most bands who play at a "national/international' level book many months in advance.

To be honest, I actually think it's better that (if possible) they don't focus on commercial bands. Think of how many bands are here today, gone tomorrow - it would, at least in my eyes, make more sense to use the valuable evening time to build up different things. I certainly don't see much value in having "Touring band x, supported by touring band y and local band z" five times a week. Other people's mileage may vary, but I think commercial music should be left to the other venues, if at all possible.

And SAC funding is there for the asking, if Moshulu did similar arts ventures I'm sure the SAC would treat their applications (it's not just given to them you know, they have to apply) with the same procedures they apply to every application.

As for the link to ACC, that tells you nothing. The grant could be 1, 5000 or shedloads. The lease and service arrangements could be comparable to current market rates for all you know.

It would be very interesting to find out what the lease and service arrangements actually are. I would hope that it's comparable to current market rates (and that the council isn't just giving them the money back in grant funding) - but until someone that knows better says so, we're none the wiser.

Waht does it matter to you anyway, you're a student in Essex. You probably don't even pay council tax there, never mind here where the money's coming from!

I've actually been billed for council tax in Aberdeen. It's still my secondary residence, and because (apparently) you're liable during the summer months, I've been hit with a double bill for Essex and Aberdeen. So I do have a financial interest in what goes on in Aberdeen - I've been hit for nearly 4 months worth of council tax there and here, and neither seems willing to apply the second residence discount either.

It would be interesting to find out exactly how much money has been saved to the taxpayer as a result of all this fuss. If you look at it from an outsider point of view, it's all very convenient that the council pulled the plug on funding to the old operating structure, only for it to be subsequently brought under the control of the same trust that controls HMT and the Music Hall.

Most honest thing you've said in a long time.

You're a staff member Chris, why make comments like this? It's kind of funny.....I make posts in an attempt to stir up some discussion, and you're making this kind of comments.

Maybe...look at your signature and take heed from what happens when you get nothing but mediocrity and banality?