News:

Welcome to the Renaissancefestival.com Forums!  Please post an introduction after signing up!

For an updated map of Ren Fests check out The Ren List at http://www.therenlist.com!

The Chat server is now running again, just select chat on the menu!

Main Menu

Economics of the faire

Started by Prof. John Bull, November 16, 2009, 01:55:02 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Prof. John Bull

(Partly an effort to avoid derailing the stage & street thread)

Substantially all forms of employment that are enjoyable and rich in intangible rewards pay poorly.  Nowhere is this more true than in the arts.  Visit any forum frequented by commercial musicians, photographers, actors, sculptors, painters, writers, etc., and if you read between the lines, an omnipresent low-level buzz of discontent over pay rates and frustration with newcomers to the activity screwing up the market can be discerned.

Fest performers are therefore in good company.

I think it's interesting to examine the economics.  Taking TRF as an example, typical attendance is 400,000, with tickets at $23 less discounts.  If we make a generous allowance for discounts and passes, we might still imagine gate receipts somewhere in the neighborhood of $6 million.  We also might imagine that booth fees and net proceeds from food and beverage sales (itself surely a profit center even when the cost of employees and food is considered) drive this higher.

The other large fests are managed similarly and we might imagine that the situation is roughly similar.

What becomes clear is that performers aren't a significant part of the budget.  If you count the number of paid performers and multiply by typical rates, performers are less than 10% of the budget.  It's puzzling to me because I just don't see where the money goes.  Publicity, sure, some of it.  Facility maintenance, some, though it's hard to look and see how that can take millions a year.

Yet we have comments like these:

Quote from: Carl Heinz on November 16, 2009, 12:57:14 PM
I've not found anyone who made a lot of money backing a faire.  I've known a number who have had little or no return on their investments or lost money.   At best, faire is a marginal enterprise.  If we want to play, we live with it.  If not, we move on.

So, where does all the money go?

L Dale Walter

I can only speak for the faire that I had a hand in managing, which was Silver leaf Ren Faire, so this might not apply to all shows.

Our biggest expense was site maintenance, and it was on going and never ending.  From sand washing off the joust field and having to be replaced, to maintaining the ever sinking paths, to dealing with water issues, that was a HUGE strain on our budget that just never gets better.  Problem is you can't budget for it.  Entertainment I can set a price for, and keep to that.  When a huge storm hits 3 days out of show, and you have to rent tons of equipment just to repair the site (this happened in 2008), you just don't see that coming.  Plus SLRF doesn't even have permanent buildings, so I can only imagine the costs of keeping those up to code.

Advertising is a big expense as well.  I didn't oversee that, but having an MBA and knowing the market, I know it isn't cheap.  Without that you are dead in the water.  Remember 95% of your crowd do not read this, or any other ren board.  If you don't remind them of your event, they will put their $$$ elsewhere.

The thing that people don't get is that I can fill a show, that is easy.  But can you fill a show where your capacity pays for the filling of the show?  Book the Rolling Stones and you will sell out a bar, but if the bar seats 250, there is no way you can make it back, UNLESS people wat to pay $5000 a seat, and that is doubtful.  We had an event in 2006 that gave us our biggest day ever, but attendance couldn't offset the cost of the event.  Believe me it sucks when you break attendance records, and are in the red due to the cost of the draw.

That's just my perspective, your mileage may vary...
LDW

Sonata

I would imagine that property taxes and liability insurance also take quite a chunk out of the potential profits.
Humans need fantasy to be human, to be the place where the fallen angel meets the rising ape. Terry Pratchett

Carl Heinz

Since ours is no longer a permanent site, a chunk goes to LA County.  A comparatively small number of sites are actually owned by the events.  Then there's the expense of rebuilding the site each year, such things as privies, renting office trailers, office space for year round staff, and year round staff.  In addition to the entertainment staff, there are such expenses as Security, parking, first aid, etc., and other infrastructure expenses..

When RPFS was owned by REC, it was publicly traded and budgets were a matter of public record.  You might want to dig back a few years to find a prospectus.  It typically ran in the red. In fact, I can't recall a year when it ran in the black.   We got a bit of a write off when it became a penny stock.

Northern is now run by a corporation made up of vendors and participants who have purchased stock in the operating corporation.  They've been running if for several years and, I understand, they've about broken even in the last year or two.  The LLC which "owns" the Guild of St Cuthbert is a shareholder.

I get the impression that Arizona and Minnesota may be in better shape, but that's only a guess.  I think they own their sites but I'm not certain.  When we attended Arizona, the entertainment staff consisted of a small number of theme characters and mostly pass the hat events.  It apeared that the "profit" there was being plowed back into site develolpment.

As you've pointed out, a goodly amount goes for publicity and comps.

I stand by my original statement.

We contribute our time and effort because we enjoy faire and want to keep it going.


Carl Heinz
Guild of St Cuthbert

Terry Griffith

I don't have specific information on profit and loss and I don't want to dispute the facts known by someone who does but something just doesn't seem right here.  Maybe there is a difference between the small faires that don't own their sites nor have permanent buildings and the larger faires that do.  I know for sure that the owners of larger faires that do own the property with permanent buildings are not doing it just for the love of doing it.  There is profit to be made if it is well managed and properly advertised.  These owners put a great deal of planning and money into making their events bigger each year and you can't invest capital on projects that are failing. 

I have seen a faire that has failed after many years in the same location and when a new owner bought it out, he made it profitable.    Proper management is everything and it is an artform in itself.  The faires that are operated as a profitable business can and do succeed and the faires that are run just for the love of faire usually fail.  It is a business like any other that requires a desire to make money in the end.  Some of the practices of successful faires are not always popular by the participants but they need to understand why those things are done.

During these hard economic times, faire owners need to adjust something to make up for the losses caused by higher operation costs.  There are two things that are happening at some faires around the country.  Some have cut the cast and performers pay in half.  Others kept the previous pay rate and cut the number of cast members in half.  The casts and performers in both situations have complained but the faires go on with record numbers at the gate.  It must take a very cold heart to make a faire work but they do whatever it takes. 
"There's a unicorn that's hangin' in what's known as father's room......"

L Dale Walter

Quote from: Terry Griffith on November 16, 2009, 09:43:39 PM
During these hard economic times, faire owners need to adjust something to make up for the losses caused by higher operation costs.  There are two things that are happening at some faires around the country.  Some have cut the cast and performers pay in half.  Others kept the previous pay rate and cut the number of cast members in half.  The casts and performers in both situations have complained but the faires go on with record numbers at the gate.  It must take a very cold heart to make a faire work but they do whatever it takes. 

One must remember, it is show BUSINESS.   In this economy people shop for deal, so must businesses.

Plus, no one has to work for any faire.  Local casts are most able to just say "ummm, not working for that much..." and not do the show.  However, as many are caught up in the social event, they do it anyway, and grumble about the pay.

I have walked away from several Ren shows several times, and plied my shows, and talent, elsewhere.  As a performer you have to be flexible.  In 2006 I went from playing Porthos in a scenario show, to a vampire guitar player in a stage show.  It pays to have multiple talents, and, remember, if the check clears the bank, it's art!

LDW

Lady L

Quote from: Carl Heinz on November 16, 2009, 07:04:27 PM

I get the impression that Arizona and Minnesota may be in better shape, but that's only a guess.  I think they own their sites but I'm not certain.

Mid America Festivals (Minnesota) didn't own the land, they owned the festival. They leased the land from other people. As I understand it, the landowners are now part of the new lease agreement with the festival management. I don't know anything about how they split the costs/profits and I don't know anything about the AZ faire.
Former Shop Owner at MNRF

aerial angels

Different faires work in different ways. There are faires that make money and faires that don't. There are faires that make large profits, faires that make small profits, and faires that lose money in varying amounts.

It's like trying to generalize about a retail store. Family business or corporation? Multi-national firm or small-town storefront? Staff size? Are there volunteers or is everyone paid, or a mix? What's the mission - community event, benefit, for-profit extravaganza?

Just as you can't compare the Goodwill store with Macy's, you can't make assumptions about every festival.

Big expenses are always insurance, site costs, taxes, PR, liquor license, local permits, entertainment, garbage/power/water/potties. And there are lots of small expenses.

We might be able to give you better insight if you mentioned who you are, where you're from, what aspect of faire you do, what fairs you've been to, etc.

* * *

And in response to:
Quote
Substantially all forms of employment that are enjoyable and rich in intangible rewards pay poorly.  Nowhere is this more true than in the arts.  Visit any forum frequented by commercial musicians, photographers, actors, sculptors, painters, writers, etc., and if you read between the lines, an omnipresent low-level buzz of discontent over pay rates and frustration with newcomers to the activity screwing up the market can be discerned.

I'll reprint a comment I posted to Stephen Brust (the fantasy novelist)'s blog:

Quote
I'm a professional street performer :) And I sure wish the comments had fewer characterizations of artists as never making any money and art as something that just doesn't pay because that's a bovine poopie lie and an excuse to either not be good enough, smart enough, or work hard enough to make it good and make it your living.

If you can't be a fulltime artist because it's not paying you, then either choose to do it in a way that makes money (by being smarter, working harder, or getting better) or accept that it's your delightful hobby, not that you're really a fulltime artist who just isn't supported as you deserve by society, boo hoo.

Is IS possible to make a living as a fulltime artist, and it sends the wrong message to society as a whole when we stomp around like six year olds whose mother won't give them ice cream until their room is clean. Nobody else gets paid unless they figure out how to do a job people will pay them for, and artists are no more entitled to societal support than any other vital, necessary function.

If you can, generate content that people are happy to pay you for. If you can't, start figuring out what else you can sell, or how or where else you can sell it.

I am sick and tired of whiners who are really hobbyists bitching and moaning about art not paying well. It DOES pay well - it just is a lot pickier about whom it pays than one might suspect. I'm going back to my doctors here (from the other post) - If an artist put the amount of time and energy and personal financial investment into their art career that a doctor put into med school, internship, and residency, chances are pretty good they would be a working artist.

It is 100% possible to be a working artist. It is even possible to be a wealthy artist. But you know what, if someone whined:

"How come I'm not a BRAIN SURGEON!  I've ALWAYS WANTED to be a brain surgeon and NO-ONE WILL PAY ME to operate on their BRAIN!!!! I only get to CUT OPEN BRAINS on the WEEKEND in that CLINIC in the BAD PART OF TOWN instead of in the GOOD HOSPITAL!!!"

We would expect them to have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars and ten or more years of their life before taking that complaint seriously.

Being an artist is no different. It's a career that a lot of people want and very few people have the drive, work ethic, and perseverance (notice "talent" is not on that list) to achieve. It's not that the art business is any harder than any other line of work, it's that people expect it to be easier. They expect that it's going to be a magic world of discovery when in fact it's a hard cold realm of self-employment.

I suspect the low-level buzz of discontent can at least partly be attributed to the fact that the working artists are too busy making art and selling it to do much blog posting. On that note, gotta run - I have clients to email and pages to write :)



Prof. John Bull

Aerial,

I think I agree with most of that.  It is certainly true that there are people who can't make a living in the arts because they lack talent (either due to a lack of training or a lack of aptitude or both).  There are also people who can't make a living in the arts because they don't understand the market or how to produce art (broadly speaking to include theater, music, visual arts, and so forth).

On the other hand wages are low and are driven down by people who have day jobs and are willing to work for free or for little.  There are people with a high school education making more money running a 1-800-GOT-JUNK franchise than people with MFAs working in their chosen field.

temper

 >:(

Wow, did my blood pressure so go up reading some of these comments.
I guess some of you would call me a "hobbyist" even though we make a profit -but I work full-time at *another* job I love.
I guess I'm a hobbyist because no one is particularly interested in buying the papers from symposia and I don't charge for them.
I'd like to quote a full-time sword teacher here on the East Coast
"There has to be an easier way to make 20,000.00 a year" (this is a joke, folks if you are familiar with the COL in this area)
So a construction crew that subcontracts can't be a 'professional' because they don't have full-time staff that does *everything?*
To sum up, I don't think it's a mark of shame to supplement one's income with multiple talents.
As the much scoffed "weekender" I get along fine with people who do this full time. And I wouldn't consider me or anyone who works for me "unprofessional" and any of our corporate customers would feel comfortable with the "p" word. (Two of my favorite faire owner/organizers are lawyers by day)
So please folks, take care as to the depth and breadth of that broad brush
Now having vented my spleen,

I rarely complain about pay, if it sucks, we won't take it unless it has big benefits (disgustingly fantastic advertising for instance) and if I was all about that, I'd be doing birthday parties every weekend. Ka-Ching.

I agree about investing on one's art.  However I did work as a freelance artist for two years and when a sufficient amount of people had stiffed me (yes, I was trusting) I said "enough."  If you don't make enough money, don't do it.

Performers should not undersell themselves to greedy faires (or any other employer of that type) and much as I love doing this, the first time someone tries the "love of faire" hook/guilt trip on me in conversation, my eyes rolls so far back into my head that I can tell you what my brainstem looks like.  But I also believe in karma, I am watching the recession weed out the bad businesses, because although a lot of their help is free, gas, equipment and costuming is NOT and once that coin of goodwill is spent-buh-bye Bad Faire.


Temper; what makes a good sword, be sure to keep it.

L Dale Walter

Beyond a certain point, talent, as in the actual performance, has little to do with success.  I spoke with a very talented guitarist at last years NAMM show (the big music merchandise show in LA) who was amazingly taleted, and had played with Wicked Wisdom (Jada Pinket - Will Smith's wife's band) on Ozzfest (and the Tonight show), yet he was living on Ramen noodles, and recording in his apartment with a drum machine.

When I showed him our press kit for the Netherworld: Vampire Apocalypse show, he was blown away.  The kit included pictures, bios, a DVD, marketing materials, and reasons on why my show will make someone money if they book it, broken down in financial terms.  He said to me "Hell, Wicked Wisdom never even had press like this..."

Now this guy could smoke me on guitar, but couldn't make the leap to selling his talents.  They always say the best guitar players are home in their basements right now, practicing, and you will never hear them.  Really good guitar players think I suck, but they are not our fan base, and don't buy tickets to shows.  My sponsorship deals are based on the fact that we SELL, and look amazing doing so (providing great shots of us with our sponsors product), not that I can rip a scale faster than anyone else, or what some basement aficionado thinks of my playing.

Faires are much the same thing.  I recently told a young performer how to make money on a show, how to construct it, document it, and sell it.  I told him you don't get paid by saying "I will do a great show if you pay me..."  but rather by DOING a great show, and then saying "Here are the stage counts, here are pictures, here are a stack of e-mails from fans.  Now, we really like doing your show, and we have proven we are a draw..." and it goes from there.   You have to take the long view, and be willing to put off getting paid sometimes to make money later.

He told me that was too much work... ::sigh::

It's basically a "work in = rewards out" kind of thing.  I have been doing this since 1981, when I was a 16 year old floundering as a street character.  My resume now would take several pages to enumerate and is only PARTIALLY ren fest stuff.  It's what you can bring to the table in terms of DRAW and SELL that gets you paid, not that you LOVE Ren Fests, or that (the one I love to hear) that "This is your LIFE!!!"  That's all great, but if you can't get the job done, meaning put butts in the seats and KEEP them there, plus provide pictures/interviews/press for your venue, then you are never going to succeeded. 

L Dale Walter

Quote from: temper on November 17, 2009, 08:29:26 AM
To sum up, I don't think it's a mark of shame to supplement one's income with multiple talents.
Not at all, in my book.

The reason I can do what I do with Ren Fests is BECAUSE I have other talents, and another full time job.  One of the biggest problems I see in ren fest shows is undercapitalization, meaning they can't sink the money in to make their show rock, because they just don't have it to spend.  I do, and can.  I make it back, but sometimes the capital outlay to get a show up is heavy, and, if you don't have it, well, no show...

If all of your eggs are not in one basket, you have more flexibility.  This does not make you "unprofessional".  Single product companies rarely survive, and the most successful Ren Fest performers I know have several shows, plus other money making ventures (games, exhibits, booths) that all contribute to that bottom line.  Whether these contributors are vertical or horizontal integrations are personal choice, but I'll take a recession resistant horizontal spread over an income stream that is all tied together vertically.

aerial angels

Quote from: Prof. John Bull on November 17, 2009, 12:39:02 AM
Aerial,

On the other hand wages are low and are driven down by people who have day jobs and are willing to work for free or for little.  There are people with a high school education making more money running a 1-800-GOT-JUNK franchise than people with MFAs working in their chosen field.

Wages are no lower in the arts than in any other field of self-employment. It's not that it's art, it's that it's entrepreneurship, and most people aren't suited to be entrepreneurs. The working performers I know (and I'm using that category to mean, "people at the renfaire who do this as their primary living") own houses and cars, get braces for their kids, and live the lives they want to live on their performing pay.

There are other fields where making money is a problem because others are willing to do it more cheaply - like, selling books on Amazon, for example. However, the challenge is to figure out what you have that someone else doesn't. Yes, some faires will hire locals for free or for hat or for cheap rather than a professional act that might be better, and their patrons generally won't know the difference, but you have two choices: You can whine and moan about how you're better and they should hire you; or you can go find another job where they value what you bring. People who make the first choice are complaining about their MFA not getting them anything. People in the second category are working.

I don't get the point of the (not unique to you) comment that people [with inferior qualifications] and/or [doing less-artsy job] are somehow less deserving of making money than [artist with qualification]. If the high school grad (or drop-out for that matter) with the garbage franchise makes a living through her efforts, where is the Rule From God that says "artists should make more"? Why?

There are lots of people without advanced degrees, or working in non-glamorous fields, who make more than people with advanced degrees or in glamorous fields.  So I guess I don't get your point.

Are you saying: Anyone with an MFA deserves to make a living in their chosen field?
Are you saying: Anyone who does a job in the arts should be making more money than anyone not in the arts?

What's your actual point? Because all I'm getting here is "some people in some fields make more money than other people in other fields" and while that's loosey-goosey enough to be true, it doesn't really forward the discussion.

aerial angels

Quote from: temper on November 17, 2009, 08:29:26 AM
To sum up, I don't think it's a mark of shame to supplement one's income with multiple talents.

No, it's not. The shame is only if the artist spends their time whining about how they "deserve" to make more money as an artist and how terrible it is that "society" doesn't support them.

QuoteIf you don't make enough money, don't do it.

Bingo. Or choose to do it - as you have - in a way where you enjoy the work you do, get paid a price you're happy with, and have it fit into your life as a part of your overall working time. (I don't know you in person, but it sounds like what you have is a successful part-time job, not a "hobby".)


Carl Heinz

#14
The best example I can think of who ended up having to get a day job to support his arts (and I do mean plural) is a friend of many years.

He's an excellent character actor and has had a variety of caste roles.  He's also a very good tenor and sings with what I think is the major musical group at RPFS.  He also is the instructor for apprentice BFA workshops.  But he eventually needed to find a day job.  He continues at faire.

There are many of us who do faire for the love of it.  But, if we want to maintain a comfortable standard of living, we use our other skills for "day jobs".

We got into a similar heated disagreement on AFR a number of years ago.  I saw similar comments about those willing to do faire for the love of it being attacked by "artists" who felt that their willingness to work for little eroded their earnings.  This is probably true.  But, I refuse to stop what I'm doing just to protect their incomes.  If they're truly artists, I suggest that they seek employment in venues where they don't have this competition or develop their entrepreneurial skills so that they can attain the wages they seek.  I have other skills that I used in my "day Job".  A senior programmer/analyst/IT manager can make a comfortable living.  I'm now retired, but I still play.

Sorry for the rant, but it is a hot button.
Carl Heinz
Guild of St Cuthbert