Artists payments for Glastonbury

[zahidf]

This doesn't seem right and somewhat exploitative to me

 

 

[gigpusher]

I'm very shocked at that. I know the headliners don't get paid but I thought that the other artists were paid. Unless some artists opt for a full 5 day ticket in lieu of payment I'd get that as it would still count as a payment and one I'd happily accept if I was in a small band. 

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, gigpusher said:

I'm very shocked at that. I know the headliners don't get paid but I thought that the other artists were paid. Unless some artists opt for a full 5 day ticket in lieu of payment I'd get that as it would still count as a payment and one I'd happily accept if I was in a small band. 

I dunno...I think they should be paying the artist properly and not just with a ticker for the gig they are playing!

[jackarmy]

Depends who you are, and what stage(s) you are playing I guess?

I'm not familiar with the artist/band in question, but if they played any of the stages outside the big 7/8 it's probably likely that they received x amount of tickets per band member x gigs played on site.

I know this is partly why Fontaines DC played about 5 gigs at the last festival, because they wanted the extra tickets for friends and family to come with them for the weekend. 

[Skelts]

I don't know who this person is, so googled them.  It seems like she is in a band called Summer Camp and as far as I can tell, they played Williams Green for 40 minutes on Friday afternoon in 2014.  Am I missing something?  Why is this an issue they feel the need to call out now?  Presumably they got festival tickets and were happy with that at the time?

[FloorFiller]

I used to be a fan and I don’t think they ever climbed above playing quite small venues so you’d expect their pay for somewhere like Glastonbury who is known for paying lower than other festivals would be quite minimal, but I dunno... getting paid zero seems off. 

They (according to setlist.fm) haven’t played since 2014 so seems odd she’s bringing it up unless there’s something going on in the Twitter-verse that’s spurred it on, but like others have said here, it wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of the much smaller acts get offered free tickets in return for their services. I can’t imagine they would’ve played higher than maybe early doors Park.

edit: or Williams Green it seems!

Edited April 13, 2021 by FloorFiller

[Ryan1984]

4 minutes ago, Skelts said:

I don't know who this person is, so googled them.  It seems like she is in a band called Summer Camp and as far as I can tell, they played Williams Green for 40 minutes on Friday afternoon in 2014.  Am I missing something?  Why is this an issue they feel the need to call out now?  Presumably they got festival tickets and were happy with that at the time?

Elizabeth is talking about how little bands get paid for touring generally. She was doing a budget for Summer Camp’s planned tour in November and said how they’ve lost money on every one they’ve been on.

Trying to show how tough it is for any musician to make money. The Glastonbury comment came from a wider conversation.

[FloorFiller]

 

[Hugh Jass]

I thought it well known that smaller acts got very little for playing?

You play to get noticed, not to get rich.

[Gnomicide]

There was a blog doing the rounds a few years back from a DJ talking about how little he was paid, I've done a quick search but can't find it. 

[Skelts]

5 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

Elizabeth is talking about how little bands get paid for touring generally. She was doing a budget for Summer Camp’s planned tour in November and said how they’ve lost money on every one they’ve been on.

Trying to show how tough it is for any musician to make money. The Glastonbury comment came from a wider conversation.

Ok, fair enough, I don't really do Twitter so not aware of any wider context.  Just seemed a bit odd to be raising something 7 years after the event

[Quark]

1 minute ago, Hugh Jass said:

I thought it well known that smaller acts got very little for playing?

You play to get noticed, not to get rich.

Well, yes and no.

The whole thing of artists being asked to perform at zero fee for the concept of exposure has been rubbished quite a bit in general.  Are we just more willing to overlook it because it's Glastonbury?

[gigpusher]

20 minutes ago, zahidf said:

I dunno...I think they should be paying the artist properly and not just with a ticker for the gig they are playing!

Yes but if you had the option of a day pass for the day you are playing (as they only played for 40 minutes on one day) and 2 hours pay or a 5 day pass for the festival I think if I was in a small band I'd take the 5 day pass and that would be a far bigger payment than I would really be due. 

[Ryan1984]

Here’s the initial tweet: 

 

[Gnomicide]

3 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

Yes but if you had the option of a day pass for the day you are playing (as they only played for 40 minutes on one day) and 2 hours pay or a 5 day pass for the festival I think if I was in a small band I'd take the 5 day pass and that would be a far bigger payment than I would really be due. 

I don't know if it can be anything other than a 5 day pass if you are playing an early day. Short of impounding your vehicle, what are they going to do to get you off site?

[gigpusher]

2 minutes ago, Gnomicide said:

I don't know if it can be anything other than a 5 day pass if you are playing an early day. Short of impounding your vehicle, what are they going to do to get you off site?

Plenty of people leave early even in normal car parks so there's always the ability for people to come and go for as many days as they wish. I didn't think there was any obligation on acts to stay for the duration of the festival. 

[Gnomicide]

2 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

Plenty of people leave early even in normal car parks so there's always the ability for people to come and go for as many days as they wish. I didn't think there was any obligation on acts to stay for the duration of the festival. 

I get that, I'm thinking the other way round. Is there a one day artists pass i.e. you're playing Friday, you need to be gone Saturday? I'd have thought the option was if you have an artists pass, you can automatically stay for the weekend if you want.

I've read loads of accounts of acts camping.

[mattiloy]

18 minutes ago, Quark said:

Well, yes and no.

The whole thing of artists being asked to perform at zero fee for the concept of exposure has been rubbished quite a bit in general.  Are we just more willing to overlook it because it's Glastonbury?

 

Basically yes. The face value of the ticket for a twopiece as they are (and possibly they got some more for pals idk) is surely by a magnitude greater than they’d make off a cut of shifting 30-50 tickets at 8 quid a pop at the dog and duck.
 

Bands like this are ten a penny and to be frank are never gonna hit the big time, not really gonna make a living from it so they are not professional musicians in my book. So to actually play Glastonbury and get free tickets is a career high IMO.

+ they agreed too! If they were that arsed about it at the time, Why not say no?

 

Ultimately festivals are built to be good value for customers. If you paid a normal gig ticket price for every band you watched while there, the festival ticket would have to be about 500 quid.

Edited April 13, 2021 by mattiloy

[st dan]

Surely it would have been known that there was no fee at the time of booking though?
If she didn’t like that or didn’t think it was fair, then couldn’t she have just declined the offer of playing? Whether that is fair or not is a different matter, but not sure you can take the offer and then complain about it, knowing full well what the offer was beforehand. 

Edited April 13, 2021 by st dan

[Zoo Music Girl]

Going back a way, but my friend's band definitely didn't get paid when they use to play back in the early noughties. They seemed to suggest it was standard for bands of their size (pretty small). 

43 minutes ago, gigpusher said:

I'm very shocked at that. I know the headliners don't get paid but I thought that the other artists were paid. Unless some artists opt for a full 5 day ticket in lieu of payment I'd get that as it would still count as a payment and one I'd happily accept if I was in a small band. 

The headliners do get paid don't they? Thought it was just a bit less than other places.

[found home in 2009]

I don't know if he got a fee or only tickets, but I remember Frank Turner mentioning that the first time he played Glastonbury, they gave him less tickets than there were people in his band, and he had to sneak in hiding between amps in the back of a van.

[gigpusher]

Just now, Zoo Music Girl said:

Going back a way, but my friend's band definitely didn't get paid when they use to play back in the early noughties. They seemed to suggest it was standard for bands of their size (pretty small). 

The headliners do get paid don't they? Thought it was just a bit less than other places.

Sorry I meant that a lot of them refuse payment and if you are big enough and able to do that it is great as the proceeds of the  festival go to charity. I know a few bigger artists in recent years have not take payment and Fatboy Slim is obviously famous for never cashing a Glastonbury cheque. 

I do also think playing for a ticket is perfectly reasonable recompense for many artists let's face it, it's considerably easier that 3 or 4 8 hours shifts cleaning toilets, checking wristbands etc and I would give anything to be able to do a short gig of any description for a full festival ticket. The other option is they do get paid but that they only get to stay for the time they are playing and so allow Glastonbury to have a larger capacity to sell tickets. 

[Hugh Jass]

22 minutes ago, Quark said:

Well, yes and no.

The whole thing of artists being asked to perform at zero fee for the concept of exposure has been rubbished quite a bit in general.  Are we just more willing to overlook it because it's Glastonbury?

A fair point, but at the same time they're booked to play early doors WG to probably three people, a dog and a guy who is still passed out in the tent from the night before. How much would they realistically expect to earn from the gig? Some will play for free for the sheer thrill of playing at the world's biggest festival, some will do it for the exposure, some will do it for the tickets...

I fully appreciate that even artists have bills to pay, kids to feed, etc and to some it is just a job, but those would have been the terms offered when they were booked to play. They could have told them to stuff their offer. 

[zahidf]

Just now, Hugh Jass said:

A fair point, but at the same time they're booked to play early doors WG to probably three people, a dog and a guy who is still passed out in the tent from the night before. How much would they realistically expect to earn from the gig? Some will play for free for the sheer thrill of playing at the world's biggest festival, some will do it for the exposure, some will do it for the tickets...

I fully appreciate that even artists have bills to pay, kids to feed, etc and to some it is just a job, but those would have been the terms offered when they were booked to play. They could have told them to stuff their offer. 

Its the bolded elements which feels exploitative to me. I appreciate its a wider music industry issue, but i would have hoped Glasto would be above all that!

 

And yes, they can always refuse the festivals terms, but that means no music career in all likelihood, ( again, not limited to glasto but refusing to pay all festivals). And if you cant afford to play tours/festivals, then it just becomes a rich persons hobby rather than a career 

As the industry leader, i think glasto should be setting a good example for this. 

[Quark]

12 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

 

Basically yes. The face value of the ticket for a twopiece as they are (and possibly they got some more for pals idk) is surely by a magnitude greater than they’d make off a cut of shifting 30-50 tickets at 8 quid a pop at the dog and duck.
 

Bands like this are ten a penny and to be frank are never gonna hit the big time, not really gonna make a living from it so they are not professional musicians in my book. So to actually play Glastonbury and get free tickets is a career high IMO.

+ they agreed too! If they were that arsed about it at the time, Why not say no?

 

Ultimately festivals are built to be good value for customers. If you paid a normal gig ticket price for every band you watched while there, the festival ticket would have to be about 500 quid.

 

2 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

A fair point, but at the same time they're booked to play early doors WG to probably three people, a dog and a guy who is still passed out in the tent from the night before. How much would they realistically expect to earn from the gig? Some will play for free for the sheer thrill of playing at the world's biggest festival, some will do it for the exposure, some will do it for the tickets...

I fully appreciate that even artists have bills to pay, kids to feed, etc and to some it is just a job, but those would have been the terms offered when they were booked to play. They could have told them to stuff their offer. 

Don't disagree with any of that.  What I was (badly) getting at was the wider concept of artists getting asked to perform for free at places (whether it be festivals or functions or whatever) at zero fee because it will give them exposure.

When I say about overlooking it because it's Glastonbury, that's probably the wrong wording.  If bands are getting access to the festival and essentially a free ticket for an hour's work, yep you can argue that's not bad.

However, the argument that festivals represent value for money to the punter isn't necessarily the right way to look at it.  If you replace festivals with clothing, and bands with factory workers, that's an area where there's a strong argument against it being necessary so as to ensure value for money to the customer.

I know that's a big leap, and a band playing an hour at Glastonbury isn't remotely the same as someone stuck in a sweatshop getting paid pennies to make jeans, but the question about a fair price for what you do still remains, right?