Pay to play

The lower echelons of the London stand-up comedy ecosystem (which is certainly where I reside) are presently in a conniption over something called 'pay to play'. This is where a promoter charges acts for the opportunity to perform as well as charging an audience for the opportunity to watch them do.

Andrew Watts has thought more deeply about this issue than most and describes it's implications well. Because it relates to something I've been focused on recently, I'd like to expand on one aspect of his blog where he observes that: -

The promoter is always doing a new act a favour by giving him stage time.

There is a logic here on two related levels: a totally unknown act is by definition a risk; and an inexperienced act is usually of variable quality. But I'm interested in the lack of emotional intelligence in the sense that someone is 'being done a favour'. A promoter who is motivated even in part by an unequal power relationship with the acts is going to end up staging joyless shows.

I've performed for free for promoters whose pride in staging a great show shines through; equally I've been paid well by promoters who've handed over the cash with the same big smile. In either scenario I've been both thanked and thankful.

Everyone is doing everyone a favour when a great show happens, regardless of the acts getting paid

This is comedy we're talking about. If the performers aren't happy then sooner or later the audience won't be either.