fatboy Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 was reading in the paper the other day about how artists performing on the X-factor have to pay for this prime slot. Alexandria's performance cost somthing like 40'000, Bon Jovi was about 35'000 and Diana Ross was a cool million for hers. Pretty high fee's if you ask me, what do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soda Jerk Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 Fuck those chancers. They should get petrol money and a bowl of couscous like everyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatboy Posted November 7, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 Fuck those chancers. They should get petrol money and a bowl of couscous like everyone else.no, this is the fee the artists have to pay the company who does X-factor to perform on the show Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scootray Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 Probably worth it tbh or else they wouldn't be paying it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soda Jerk Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 no, this is the fee the artists have to pay the company who does X-factor to perform on the showI misread it, purely because X Factor paying for big name artists to play on their show is what makes the most sense and seems perfectly logical, reflecting the ethics of real life. Paying to play on a show is absolutely barmy. But I guess these stars have got more money than sense, and the amounts paid probably have the tiniest of effects on their bank balances I imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodsinho Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 It's a big old advert for the artists who play on the show. They're the ones who stand to benefit from being on tv to hawk their new album/DVD/steaming pile of faeces so it stands to reason that they'd have to pay for the privilege. It's bound to be more effective than putting an ad in the commercial break and they'd have to pay for that too.The show itself could manage fine without any of these folks bring on - I doubt anyone tuned into the show purely based on the fact that Bon jovi were performing their new single. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oedo 808 Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 They're not paying to perform, they're paying for advertising. Big difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish out of water Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Its not new - it goes on all the time. Think about tours; 90% of the time the support isn't picked because the headliner's like them, its because the support bought themselves onto the tour. Helps the headliners costs down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 People who pay to go on X-Factor deserve to be stiffed.In other news, didn't Biffy pay 10,000 or something to get on the Weezer tour a while back? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bungle Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 The X-factor is itself nothing but a giant advert with the sole purpose of sucking money out of the gormless twats and unlucky parents of said gormless twats that buy this shit.It should really be called xmas number 1-factor, Simon Cowells money making machine. He must be pissing himself at all these idiots that call him nasty Simon Cowell and say they hate him while at the same time pumping his pockets full of cash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RF Scott Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Its not new - it goes on all the time. Think about tours; 90% of the time the support isn't picked because the headliner's like them, its because the support bought themselves onto the tour. Helps the headliners costs down.Where are you getting 90% from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scootray Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 His arse, obviously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish out of water Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 His arse, obviously.Shut it or I'll bum you, you skin slapping tot.To be fair, and in the tradition of the current government, I have plucked the percentage out of thin air as a rough gauge.A more accurate post should have read "are the majority of tours not buy ons?"; certainly anectodal evidence from types down here seems to support the "Buy On" as a regular thing for your more well known bands. Presumably its the record company (and then ultimately the band itself that foots the bill).If you have any constructive thoughts to the contrary, feel free to present them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RF Scott Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Shut it or I'll bum you, you skin slapping tot.To be fair, and in the tradition of the current government, I have plucked the percentage out of thin air as a rough gauge.A more accurate post should have read "are the majority of tours not buy ons?"; certainly anectodal evidence from types down here seems to support the "Buy On" as a regular thing for your more well known bands. Presumably its the record company (and then ultimately the band itself that foots the bill).If you have any constructive thoughts to the contrary, feel free to present them.Sure, I know of a lot of friends' bands who have gone on tour with bands, playing venues ranging in size from The Tunnels to The Music Hall and even bigger. None of these were support-slots-for-hire. Obviously, I don't know every single band in the world's workings, but I think it's fairly safe to say that paying-to-support is in the minority, and certainly not anywhere near 90%. It's probably even safer to say that this type of deal is only prevalent in 'pop' tours (I'm talking about X Factor, boy bands, etc...) and package tours.In the vast majority of cases, support will be decided on one or a number of the following; - member(s) of headline band like/know support band personally. - member(s) of headline band's management, booking agency, etc, like/know band personally. - support band is on same record label / management company / booking agency as headline band. - headline band can't quite sell out venues on their own, and so choose support band (at least partly) on the knowledge that they will be able to bring in 50 or so people on the strength of their name alone.Right now, record companies do not have enough money to provide tour support for their bands, let alone pay to even do the tour in the first place!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tam o' Shantie Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 I know of a few local bands who have paid to be on big tours. We've been offered buy-ons for tours in the past as well...as if we could afford that shit!Someone should warn Bon Jovi about the dangers of pay to play...I bet he had to sell 40 tickets to his mates just to break even! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish out of water Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Agree with what you say to an extent but also have friends (indeed, I've experienced it myself) who have been OK'd for tours on the basis of your first two points but then been dumped (or gazumped) because of buy ons. None of these scenarios have been in the pop world - I am far too well endowed in the belly department to be in a boy band. Package tours I've never been a part of so can't comment.I suspect that the reality is a horrible grey area somewhere in the middle, as I think the temptation to reduce costs does make the temptation of a financial inducement difficult to ignore. At the end of the day, there must be a rough taste decision - Delays are not going to appear on the same tour as a metal band, for example. But inside sub-genres there'll be a fair of lee-way as long as a band ticks particular aesthetic boxes.For really small DIY bands putting their own tours on, none of the above would apply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Korps Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Someone should warn Bon Jovi about the dangers of pay to play...I bet he had to sell 40 tickets to his mates just to break even!perhaps he had a minimum 50 tickets to sell at 5 each and took the gamble by taking out a loan and offering them cut price to ensure bodies through the door. bet he was bricking it with such a high risk strategy... especially by playing a new tune too (well if i'd have watched it i would've known that... :O ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.