Nightclubs to pay extra for play - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Australia
-- Nightclubs to pay extra for play
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Posted by promowhore on Jul-11-2007 03:40:

quote:
Originally posted by Dean Millson
It's actually not APRA when you read it, it's the PPCA which was set up to represent the labels i believe. How surprising...

Yes, but the APRA pay through is based on what ARIA tell them is getting played (as per their data that they chose to release). The majority of ARIA directors are made up from the 4 majors. Who do you think they will be looking after ?

There is no accurate way to pay though this income on what is actually getting played in clubs, until every dj in every club submits a weekly play sheet.

Even if they did, the increase is well and truely out of line.

Posted by Dean Millson on Jul-11-2007 03:46:

mate, i agree with you

Posted by Nsonic on Jul-11-2007 05:52:

quote:
Originally posted by Marcus at Ffour
If you take the same venue open an average of 3 nights a week the cost per annum is $65,520 - up from $4368.

The former number eats the latter. huge

so...what does all this mean for the clubbers and DJs?

Posted by kittn on Jul-11-2007 08:23:

quote:
Originally posted by Nsonic
so...what does all this mean for the clubbers and DJs?

Ideally the clubs will charge a few dollars more in cover charge rather than skimping somewhere else or worse, shutting down. I hope they don't assume that clubbers "won't" pay slightly more. I'd sure as hell rather pay an extra $5, if the alternative is some shitty cover band at a pub or an RnB superclub.. ugh. Shudder.

Posted by rza on Jul-11-2007 10:22:

quote:
Originally posted by Dean Millson
I think the most interesting part of this is that most of the music played in the clubs that we all go too comes from overseas, not from local artists. So who is actually therefore getting the money from the $1 per person? Certainly not the artists who produce most of the music.

in a nutshell..

quote:
from inthemix.com.au

"After operating costs, the Phonographic Performance Company distributes half the money to record labels and the other half to Australian artists. This is based on the current ARIA Dance Charts. Those venues that play a more 'underground' or non-commercial style of music will effectively be paying for top 40 artists when they're not even playing their music!" this makes me sick. the artists i am going out to hear and support will not even benefit from me paying more, instead i will putting cash in the pockets of the major labels to further saturate the market with the music found on the ARIA dance chart? http://www.ariacharts.com.au/pages/....asp?chart=1D20

Posted by walter78 on Jul-11-2007 15:52:

quote:
Originally posted by James Brooke

The winners here are artists and producers...

w0rd!!

Posted by gumble on Jul-11-2007 16:27:

quote:
Originally posted by kittn
I'd sure as hell rather pay an extra $5, if the alternative is some shitty cover band at a pub or an RnB superclub.. ugh. Shudder.

..or a decent aus band for around $15, and they get a "good" cut of that.

Posted by Rusty O'Hara on Jul-12-2007 00:28:

quote:
Originally posted by James Brooke
yeah it sucks but there isn't much we can do about it...

There is a lot that can be done about it. Shrugging of shoulders and saying "not much we can do" is obviously the worst course of action.

Posted by Domesticated on Jul-12-2007 00:32:

Who gives a shit?

Future will raise ticket prices to all their events by $2.80.

Big whoop.

Posted by Rusty O'Hara on Jul-12-2007 00:42:

quote:
Originally posted by Dean Millson
I think the most interesting part of this is that most of the music played in the clubs that we all go too comes from overseas, not from local artists. So who is actually therefore getting the money from the $1 per person? Certainly not the artists who produce most of the music.

Depends on which places you go, and what sort of music you go to?

I've been to events that are 100% local music. The income from that based to artists based on this scheme is basically being analysed on the basis of the ARIA Dance Chart. So, say there was a theoretical $100 kitty from that one event, and none of these artists are on the ARIA charts, TV Rock and Rogue Traders get all the royalties, how does that work?

Posted by Dean Millson on Jul-12-2007 00:54:

That's exactly how it works by the sounds of it.

Hence why i'm rather skeptical about the whole thing. This seems like the easiest model for the majors to make a grab for cash, not the best model to support artists.

Posted by Nsonic on Jul-12-2007 14:58:

Therefore
Protest time.

(in the form of a warehouse rave, thanks)

Pages (2): « 1 [2]