Pay-to-Play Schemes

lwk

Junior Member
The drummer from a band I did some design work for recently told me about a predicament he is in with a booking agency. They signed a contract (mistake) saying they had to sell 50 tickets at $10 a pop, or cover what tickets they didn't sell. After not selling any tickets they decided they didn't want to play. They are now being told that they better pay the $500 or face small claims court with "one of the top lawyers in the country".

While I understand that legally the band is responsible for coming up with that money and they shouldn't have signed the contract if they didn't agree to the terms, or didn't understand what it meant. But setting that aside, I think this scheme is extremely parasitic and predatory. The bands are usually footed with a large bill, and get very little out of it, while the promoter laughs all the way to the bank.

Anyone have any pay-to-play horror stories? Anyone disagree and think this system is a god send?
 
A lesson learned the hard way - never sign a contract without getting a professional opinion. Unfortunately he only has himself to blame in this instance, as stupid as pay-to-play is. That said, I'd find it highly unlikely that one of 'the best lawyers in the country' is going to be taking on a nobody band in a small claims court.
Avoiding pay-to-play is an excellent incentive for a band to work and get good.
 
The band should tell them to take them to court, the guys bluffing. For 500.00? Top Lawyer? Penniless musicians? Please. Stupid mistake no doubt but they are getting railroaded. Let them sue. They won't waste their time for 500.00
 
My band used to pay to play a LONG time ago. We only had to sell 20 tickets, though, which usually wasn't a problem. I never liked the idea, but it was "the place" to play, so we jumped through their hoops. We understood the arrangement of buying the rest of the tickets ourselves if we didn't sell them all.
 
A lesson learned the hard way - never sign a contract without getting a professional opinion. Unfortunately he only has himself to blame in this instance, as stupid as pay-to-play is. That said, I'd find it highly unlikely that one of 'the best lawyers in the country' is going to be taking on a nobody band in a small claims court.
Avoiding pay-to-play is an excellent incentive for a band to work and get good.


Exactly right. Never sign anything except an autograph without having it reviewed by an attorney - and never sign an autograph at the bottom right hand side of a blank piece of letter size paper!!

The chances of finding yourself in litigation for $500 is small. The chances of a top rate litigator taking the case (unless he or she is related to someone), is almost zero. Depending on where you are located most top rate litigators charge anywhere from $250 to $600 per hour. Not much financial incentive to retain that person to recover $500. Also most litigators rarely go into small claims court.

If you find yourself being hauled into small claims court, send me a pm: I will help. There are always defenses to a contract action and you should not assume so quickly that "the band is responsible for coming up with the money."

Paul
 
A lesson learned the hard way - never sign a contract without getting a professional opinion. Unfortunately he only has himself to blame in this instance, as stupid as pay-to-play is. That said, I'd find it highly unlikely that one of 'the best lawyers in the country' is going to be taking on a nobody band in a small claims court.
Avoiding pay-to-play is an excellent incentive for a band to work and get good.

Remember Creedence Clearwater revival? That was probably the ultimate example of an incredibly evil contract that basically stole almost everything they made. That story should send chills down any band's spine signing a contract.
 
we've played a couple shows like that, where we've had to pay for a block of tickets whether we sold them or not. fortunately we've always managed to sell them all, so it hasn't been a problem. we've also played shows where we have to bring in enough money at the door to pay for the sound guy and the door person, otherwise we would have to pay those people ourselves. again, we've always managed to bring in enough people to pay for the staff so it hasn't been a problem. but i know exactly what you're talking about and based on our experience it seems to be pretty common.
 
Small claims courts do no use lawyers. Just you and the plaintiff and shouldn't the promoter be the one selling tickets, and the band be the ones playing the music. If he could promote there wouldn't be a problem.
 
Exactly right. Never sign anything except an autograph without having it reviewed by an attorney - and never sign an autograph at the bottom right hand side of a blank piece of letter size paper!!

The chances of finding yourself in litigation for $500 is small. The chances of a top rate litigator taking the case (unless he or she is related to someone), is almost zero. Depending on where you are located most top rate litigators charge anywhere from $250 to $600 per hour. Not much financial incentive to retain that person to recover $500. Also most litigators rarely go into small claims court.

If you find yourself being hauled into small claims court, send me a pm: I will help. There are always defenses to a contract action and you should not assume so quickly that "the band is responsible for coming up with the money."

Paul

Good to know, i'll point the guy to this thread. Thanks for all the responses thus far.
 
My band agrees to do this periodically, for really big shows. It's rare, but we know that we have enough of a following to easily sell the number of tickets needed, or we don't do it.

It sucks for your friend's band. However, I'm going to look at it from the opposite side, too. It depends on how much work the club owner did, but there's a chance that he designed and printed up the tickets, advertised at his club, possibly even put out advertisements in the local media. Also, he will now be in a rush to get a different band booked, and then have them sell the tickets in much less time, which will make it harder for them to do it.

I can't say I blame the guy for wanting your friends to honor their commitment and their contract.
 
Anyone have any pay-to-play horror stories? Anyone disagree and think this system is a god send?



The guy who works in the studio where may band rehearses told me of this incident that he went through recently. It is customary in a lot of the clubs fnear me or bands to have to sell as many of 500 tickets at $10 a pop before they get paid.. (in other words, uyopu'll never get paid) He was on a bill with five bands He himself sold 120 tickets. He sold more tickets than any other member of any other band, so his band went on last. In other words, his fans had to sift through the other four bands to hear their band. At the end of the night when he asked to get paid, the club owner said, "maybe next time. "
 
The system is not a godsend, but it's not predatory or parasitic. Was the promoter being dishonest? The band signed a clear contract and should now live up to it.

My band did this once when we were getting started just to get a gig. We basically knew we might (and did) end up paying out of our pockets for unsold tickets. We sold about 3/4 of the tickets and payed for the rest. After that we have not done this again because we didn't like it. No one forced us to sign the first contract so I don't fault the promoter. They asked us to play again under the same conditions and we refused. Later on they got us a show that we didn't have to sell tickets for, so in that respect we looked at it as a possible good connection for future gigs.

To be honest your friend's band sounds like they are being unprofessional by not wanting to play because they couldn't sell tickets like they agreed to do. Can't fault the promoter in this case.
 
Pay to play is pretty common.

It started in the 80s, and continues today.

I've generally avoided it. While your best friends may come to see your band, few are really going to actually buy tickets in advance. While the biggest name clubs in Los Angeles still do play to play, there are enough other clubs that don't that it's pretty easy to avoid the system.

It's really dumb. While I see the clubs motivation, to guarantee that your small, unheard of band can actually bring some money in, it always ends up rather pointless. Bands are chosen on their willingness to cover their ticket costs, not quality. Bands with rich parents end up playing to no one, while the good bands stay home. Just because a band paid for their tickets out of their pocket doesn't mean anyone is at the bar buying drinks.
 
Just because a band paid for their tickets out of their pocket doesn't mean anyone is at the bar buying drinks.

That's the point. It's an insurance policy for the club owner. If the band has to pay for their own tickets, it means that the bar isn't going to be packed, people aren't going to be buying drinks. Therefore, the bar still makes money (from the band). Bars are businesses. They don't exist as a way for bands to make it. They don't exist to help musicians start or further their careers. They exist to sell booze at ridiculously inflated prices. Why should a bar pay entertainment if the only people who come out are the bar regulars? It would actually be a better business decision not to have entertainment at all, if that is the situation.

You could argue that the bar can avoid this problem by just paying the door (or $100 or $200 plus door). However, when a bar books a band, they do it to get the extra people in, and if they book one band that doesn't bring anyone in, odds are they could have booked another band that WOULD have brought more people in. Therefore, the bar is losing money (or, at least, potential money) every time some start-up band without a fan base plays there. So, the bars insure themselves from this problem by selling tickets.

It's not a scheme. It's a way to make sure that these places keep their profits up, and if your band has a following, you get paid, the band profits, and everyone is happy.
 
i only think the "pay to play" arrangement is underhanded if the band is not told all the terms and conditions in advance or is somehow misled. if you as a band enter into something like that will full knowledge of what you're getting into, then you need to hold up your end of the deal. it's a business contract like any other and must be honored.
 
They are now being told that they better pay the $500 or face small claims court with "one of the top lawyers in the country".

Quick insight - the vast majority of small claims cases in the US are done without lawyers. "Top lawyers" will bill far in excess of that $500 - my wife who is an attorney bills several hundred dollars an hour. You can write that claim off as bogus.

And yeah - pay to play is not a great system but they signed the agreement. They should just play the gig and get some practice - if the booking agent comes to court with a signed contract they'll probably owe the $500 anyway.
 
Back
Top