Karaoke Forums

I'll be more emphatic about this point than Cueball. A karaoke singer is NOT by any stretch of the imagination an entertainer, no matter how talented you or they think they are.

- Clearly, there are the divas/the prima donnas among karaoke singers who THINK they are the entertainment, but the singers I hung with when I went out singing surely didn't think they were
- If karaoke singers are in fact the entertainment, those who frequent karaoke (both singers and non-singers) would only attend, IMO, those shows with fabulous, entertaining singers. That, however, has not been my experience between here and Las Vegas!
- The singers I associate with, as well as myself, don't consider ourselves to be "THE Entertainment"
- JR in Hawaii, in order to make money for his show, charges every singer for each song they sing. With your business model, Joe, JR would be out of work before he got started
- Many karaoke hosts on this forum (I guess most of us can sing somewhat decently) don't even consider themselves to be entertainers!
- Regardless of the talent level displayed, not everyone who has a good voice is entertaining; some lack stage presence, personality, knowledge of how to use a microphone, awareness that their material is boring and that they are boring
- Most karaoke singers have little if any talent; someone with no talent is not entertaining. (NOTE: There are singers with no singing talent that are often found to be entertaining due to other qualities they possess)
- Unlike a band that may have nothing more than a "verbal contract" to entertain and get paid for doing so, there is no acknowledgment that a karaoke singer is being invited in to entertain and certainly no pay is expected
- And if the singers are the entertainment, why is the KJ expecting to get paid?
- And if the singers are the entertainment, why should any singer pay for anything? Give em free food and drinks as well, all night. (NOTE: there are a few places that GIVE a free drink to singers the first time they get up TO HELP STIMULATE INTEREST IN THE AUDIENCE TO PARTICIPATE AS SINGERS)
- Now, you may say I have mis-interpreted your meaning (which so often happens here, even with my well-written posts). So I'll play Devil's Advocate as I so often do. I will guess that you don't, in fact, consider any ONE individual singer to be the entertainment, but rather, you consider the amalgam of singers to be "the entertainment," whether any of them are actually entertaining, or not.

That maybe a reasonable position. However, in that premise the word SINGERS is plural, a group. So, charge each and every singer as you would anyone else in the audience and those that don't want to contribute won't come and you'll still have SINGERS!

If in order to be profitable a venue needs karaoke singers to pay "Per Song" they sing, or pay a Cover Charge, or spend the equivalent thereof on food and beverages, so be it. If any singer thinks he or she is too good and shouldn't have to pay, let them find a job that pays them for their talent.

When I went out singing, I was happy to support the shows that I attended with my wallet. And the freeloaders are what helped me to eventually decide to do most of my singing at home. I don't want to spend money to hear someone else who is not spending money sing, I don't owe any freeloader that courtesy! And I no longer care to contribute to the bottom line of a forum at which freeloaders are regularly welcomed as are contributing customers! Meanwhile, if the freeloaders went somewhere else, those who actually support the show/venue would have greater personal enjoyment from their experience! That may actually be better for all in the long-run.

Now, look where you made me go, Joe! But now I more fully understand why you and I so strongly clash on the issue of "freeloaders". Anyone who believes that the singers don't have to contribute to the business' coffers as do non-singing patrons is going to be at odds with my thinking regarding freeloaders, both as a singer and as a businessman! And as to my way of thinking the expenditures made by those would who regularly accompany people that sing but spend little if anything, has always negated my labeling that non-spending singers as a "Freeloader"! The reality is that you now have a regular group of people who frequent your business. Some may sing; some may not! And some in the group may spend more than others. But those who come by themselves and don't spend are FREELOADERS!

Keeping in mind that I'm an ex-bar owner: This is coming out as the customer paying a cover for equipment. If it was a band, one wouldn't say that. The pay to hear the band! A cover charge is for entertainment, not equipment- and they are IT. However, let's say it was an equipment charge. Would YOU pay a cover because a bar had a jukebox? How about a pool table? Hmmmm....Working beer taps? See what I mean? I wouldn't pay it either, nor would most....

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

Joe

I don't see what you mean. Though I agree I wouldn't pay a charge for something like equipment.

And let's not forget, someone usually pays to play the jukebox and you don't have to "pass the plate"; it's not that big a deal. People who play pool pay for pool. Those who "benefit" from the tap buy beer.

But those, you say, who benefit from a KJ's rig (not the bar's rig) and more important the KJ's time, don't need to contribute more than their voice?

Okay, if that's the way you see it? Again, I don't see what you mean!

If patrons of the bars expect to have any sort of "entertainment", they need to expect to pay for it one way or another. Whether it's a cover charge, or in the price of the drinks/food, or wherever the bar can make the income. If non drinking patrons come exclusively to sing, without contributing to the bottom dollar, they are abusing the whole system. In my opinion, everyone who walks in the door, whether they sing or not, play pool or not, eat or not, drink or not, somehow need to be contributing somehow, somewhere. A cover is a good idea I believe just to help with costs. Another way is the "two drink minimum", even if the don't drink alcolhol, maybe its a soda, or buying someone else a drink. But I equate the whole karaoke thing to going to the movies. Maybe not the same thing, but the same concept. If you go to the movies, buy a ticket, if you want goodies, buy them as well, but don't expect to sneak in the back door, beg food and goodies from all the little kids, and NOT get away with it. Sooner or later, you will have to pay for it, one way or another. Just as it is at karaoke, if you attend the bar, expect to pay for "services or goods" . And those that think that the singers are the entertainment? WRONG!!!!!!, have them try to sing on stage without our equipment, discs, microphones, our hosting abilities,,, it would be total mayhem. Not to mention they would probably drive every other person right out the door.

Now i'm not saying a cover is the only way for the bars to make money, it's only one way. I think it's fair to everyone, even those who think they can sit there, drinking water, eating the free peanuts, and singing too.

But back to the first question at hand, does he switch with his partner? or not? Dunno. Does he walk away from a paying show, just because the owner asks his opinion? Dunno that one either, thats for him to decide. But, if it were me, and I had the option of having a partner, seems like a good idea. Don't take it personally, he is not firing you. I think the owner has the best interest of his bar in mind, the bottom dollar. I really don't think he is trying to tell you how to run your business. Dunno that one really either. You decide.

1) I never said they had TALENT. I only said they are the entertainment- and they are. Not only for themselves, but their frends. Talented or not, they ARE entertaining! In virtually ever venue I have, there is a section of people who don't sing, but actually come in to watch, listen, and be entertained by others....


2) That's easy! We bring in the entertainment that brings in more customers, that bring in more money for the bar. ( Of course, we might be entertaining too- I'd like to think so, but of course I'm humble about my graetness.. )


3) They should pay for drinks because they are not not PROFESSIONAL entertainment. I DO agree with venues that might buy a drink or two for those that help get the ball rolling- AND bring in much more money than a drink costs the venue.


4) Eric, you are a clear and well-written poet of a poster. If someone doesn't believe me, they can ask you! .....Actually, you are dead on here. That IS the way I see it. BTW- In case you hadn't noticed, I'm a D.A. kinda guy myself. But since I'm a 2 finger typist, you have an edge.....


5) Again, as we have debated in other posts, this must be a regional thing. No venue that I work requires a cover or "per song" charge to be profitable. They make a good profit on food and liquor. Though I understand that it's tougher at beer and shot joints ( I no longer work them, but did- a LOT) that don't have the option of good margin on good food and cocktails.

Asian bars have an intersting way of doing things. The Karaoke Host DOES NOT GET PAID! Here the "per song" charge is the rule, because this is how the host gets paid. Unfortunately, there is an additional action. Bribery is also the rule. It works in these places because everyone knows it. You can bribe someone to be next, someone can offer a larger bribe, you get bumped to second, and you don't get your bribe back. We're talking 5, 10, 20, 50, or even 100 dollar bribes.

Personally, I don't like that system. Not only is it a PITA for the host, and a fortune for the customer, but can actually affect the music! If it's crowded, and the host wants to keep up, it's not unknown for them to speed tempo by a large percentage to get through them.

Like I said, this works because of the culture difference. I don't believe it would work in an American style bar. I know for a fact that If I started taking bribes, I'd be out of business at my current venues...

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

Joe,

Actually, JReynolds place is in Hawaii. And we just learnt that he charges per song. Your last post makes it clearer to me how that came about. He has a lot of tourists, and I believe that many (most?) are from Asia

I'm surprised with the condition the economy is in today they would even institute a cover charge for karaoke, not to mention where I live drinks are now 8 bucks a pop... that's $13.00 with cover charge & 1 drink before the night even gets started.

_________________
MUSIC+DANCE=LIFE

That cover charge is more than the hourly wage in this area. around here the drinks are 5 bucks and no cover Dav

Why are we getting hung up on a "cover charge" when that term means different things to different venues?

If the cover charge is $3.00 how many people would mind that?
If the "cover charge" provides you with a token good towards you first drink or food purchase, who cares?
If the "cover charge" is a one or two drink minimum, who cares?
If the "cover charge" is minimum of $15 spent in total by those occupying a table, who cares?

I always tip at least $1 for every song I sing and most of the time it is $2 per song if the KJ is doing a good job. We are talking $8-$10 for a night of singing in the average bar. That is peanuts for the entertainment value I receive. If every singer did that the KJ would not have to charge the bar nearly as much for his entertainment.

Karaoke has always been free to the patrons in my area and would be difficult to begin to charge them per song or get them to pay cover. However I see nothing wrong with paying $10 a night to karaoke by putting money in the tip jar.

One day this will be necessary as the venue can only carry the cost burden so long and the KJs always seem to be the ones who never get to raise their rates. The bars can go up on food and drink but KJs traditionally end up making the same as they did 5-10 years ago, or sometimes less. I have been making the same money for 9 years now and the only way I can do this is to do more private parties which pay much higher rates to make up the difference.

_________________
FlipSide Karaoke
Scott

This makes sense to me. I work with an owner that it is never his fault for anything. Now it sounds like this guy has the same mentality. I'd say if you have your partner take over and it doesn't do well, he's probably going to blaim you.

I just hate to see you give up a paying gig. I guess it's a matter of, do you need the money enough to put up with the whole scenario.

_________________
[shadow=pink][glow=deepskyblue]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[updown]~*~ MONKEY BUSINESS KARAOKE~*~ [/shadow][/updown][/glow]

Funny though how some novice bar owners think they know better than an experienced KJ !

One karaoke job I had the bar was taken over by a complete novice. I was building up the Saturday night nicely, attracting singers from all over the place but he wanted more. So he started making suggestions (and insisting) things like putting a random song on so that mabye the non-singers would have a go for a free shot or something - ??????????

I said "but I can only just manage to get all the singers on singing what they want to sing" without wasting time on meaningless songs that no one wants to sing. He didn't understand.

I'd only been there a few months - I went on holiday for 2 weeks, when I got back he had gone and the pub was closed ! (in fact still is)

I have the same thing. A novice bar owner who thinks she knows how to run the business.
And yes, I used to run a bar and I KNOW what it's about.
She took the bar over and now it's almost always dead.
I run karaoke there weekly every Sunday and am starting to get some patronage up on my nights.
The bartenders tell me it's their busiest night, even over and above Fridays and Saturdays!
The bar owner recently decided she doesn't want me hosting on the week that I do my once a month gig at the bar down the street.
She doesn't understand that the patrons are a completely different crowd. Those that sing at my once monthly are older and would NEVER darken her door and those that come to her bar just don't go to the other because they are mostly younger and don't feel comfortable with the older crowd.
She also doesn't get the consitency factor.
People show up for karaoke and I'm not there. They get upset and leave.
Next week they don't come back because they don't know when or IF there will be karaoke.
Just makes my job all the harder.
It's frustrating beyond belief!

OK, I'll simplify. Whether you or/and I agree, the fact is that singers VIEW THEMSELVES as the entertainment, and get bent if asked to pay for it. Since the non-singers know that the singers are non-pro, they get bent too. Thus, the way to cover the cost of entertainment is volume, both in seats filled and sales made. This is the way the bar "fools" the customers into paying for the entertainment without irritating and losing them. Their COMBINED sales ( wriggling around a "freeloader" rant ) covers the entertainment, and gosh, they just don't know it!


A side note: I GENERALLY don't accept tips at bar shows. Too many perceive these as bribes. An exception would be at the end of the night, after the show is over, if someone wishes to show appreciation for the evening. Another is for singing a request for say, a non-singing couple that wish a slow dance, or an anniversary dedication- something like that.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

Yes I agree. I've never understood the idea of Karaoke or any other regular entertainment which is say on one week then not the next or "last Thurs in month".

How are the customers expected to keep track of when it's on and when it's not. They might not get out every week but when they do they they need to know there is somewhere they enjoy thats definately going to be on.

Some of my singers come from miles away so are not regulars of the pub on other nights and wouldn't see any posters or ads in the pub.

I know why the bar owners do it - it's the vague idea that there gonna save money on the nights your not there but i'm convinced it doesn't work

Joe

Some people think that they are God. Some think they are God's gift to women. Some think there is no God.

Going back to my discussion of a year ago regarding freeloaders, I noted how I continued to frequent and spend good money at a karaoke show I enjoyed when I was unable to sing due to a problem with my throat. I can't recall now but it may have been when I had a polyps on my vocal chords.

My point, I don't care what the singers think. And my thinking is if they believe they are the entertainment, let them go entertain elsewhere! We needed paying singers and paying people in the audience.

See Karaoke Economics Thread 101 just started!

Where I am, the singers don't see themselves as the entertainment.
They are entertained by being allowed to sing.

Having said that, I would be hard-pressed to start a pay to play.
I don't think I would even get a quarter a song.
People woud be too p*ssed off.

It's a great idea if you're in a place where it can be implemented without too much fuss, as may be the case with Fred, since most of the singers are his friends and once the precedent is set, the others will follow suit.

But not in my area.

[quote="ericlater @ Tue Nov 25, 2008 8:16 am.

My point, I don't care what the singers think.![/quote]


Eric, that pretty much sums up the difference between our philosophies. Not to sound snotty ( though I know it does-apologies in advance), but since I'm doing around 260 bar shows a year in nothing but high end venues, I just have to do it my way- by giving priority to what the customer thinks. The same applies in any business.

It's not just what the singers think, it's the synergy of the show, the venue, and the patrons. That positive synergy comes from paying attention to the needs of ALL of these, regardless of personal opinion.

I guess this is why it's so hard for you to convince me. Worrying about all of this has kept me fed....

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

Joe,

What you effectively edited out of my quote left only a "snippit" of my original statement! As a result, I found that I couldn’t even agree with me after what you had omitted. So, I’ll just re-post what I actually said right here.



Now, there is one thing and one thing only that we both agree upon - there are singers who believe that they are the entertainment!

Where we disagree is that you think that singers (is that ethically speaking?) don’t need to be concerned about spending money when they go out to enjoy karaoke, since they’re the entertainment.

When we began debating this in early 2007, you excused non-spending freeloaders by making various assumptions. For example, you suggested that they could possibly be attending as part of a group. While I think that is an awfully benevolent assumption on your part, I have never been concerned about groups of people, just freeloaders who come on their own. That fact, however, had always been ignored by you and I can only assume intentionally. Now, it seems, that your rebuttal to my position has its foundation in the assumption that the singers are the entertainment.

You, furthermore, want to distinguish your thinking as a KJ to mine as a KJ in regard to this issue. Well, that’s a completely unfair comparison because when I began voicing my concerns I had not as yet gained my first karaoke job. My opinion regarding this matter was formulated by me as a customer and as a singer --- as part of the synergy you described where I attended! And while I admit that as a Kj I still hold the same opinion and haven't come upon anything to change my mind. I must emphasize that if I had not been observant as a I was as a customer to my environs and circumstances, I would probably not now have the awareness as a Kj that there are so many freeloaders and that they are a problem!

You've often noted your experience, Joe, as reason for everyone to accept your premises and arguments, in other words, you know best about such matters. I on the other hand, have never discussed credentials and or experience. And in you discussions you have indicated, virtually, that what I have described on the boards about this problem doesn't actually exist! Is that a correct reflection of what you have said?



I don't think it would be a distortion of this quote, and the entire tone of your related posts, that you would agree with me if what I had presented were ACTUALLY true.

Yet....your know-it-all attitude continued, Joe, even after DBK1009 confirmed back in that same thread in 2007 that it was truly a problem. (I just recently re-posted that DBK post within the last 4 weeks)

When your opinions started to spew forth back in March of last year I wondered what was influencing your thinking aside from hubris? What type of environment are you really familiar with that doesn’t allow you to see “beyond the nose on your face”? Today I got my answer!



"HIGH END"? Did you say High End? Of course you have no clue about what is means to fight to make your show profitable. For people with marginally profitable shows, they know what it means to hand out fliers, regularly; to print up and hand out free drink cards all over the place, to attend shows on other nights of the week in order to tell people about your shows. I’ve never attended a Karaoke show at a "high-end" venue. I attended shows that are so marginal that I got calls from the host to make sure that I was coming the next week.

Most notably, I attended shows at venues that were so far from high end that half of them are now gone! So, let me see if I have this right? I received calls from hosts of karaoke shows because they might not have enough entertainers? OR, Joe, might they have been calling me out of a concern that the Z-tape that next week might spell the demise of their show? And I was suppose to continue supporting these shows with my dollars while the divas showed up and spent nothing. Would you do that Joe? I did for a while and then wised up!



It's worthwhile noting something I posted toward the end of the current "Blowhard" thread, about a local Florida KJ who has became a topic of discussion. And while there isn't much good I can say about that person I appreciate that he has a rule in force at all of his eleven shows - if you don't pay you don't play. And you may now see the wisdom of this policy instituted by this, and I say grudgingly, successful entrepreneur!

So, while I accept that how you run your business works for you, if you say it does, why don't you try expanding your thinking and stop diminishing what others have learned from their experiences - experiences that clearly differ from yours in you High-end venues?

I only quoted that snippet because it was the only thing germaine to the thread.

I have never said that singers shouldn't support the venue, only that one or two soda drinkers don't hurt a show, that they actually can help get the ball rolling, that they MAY bring in paying friends, that booting them will result in negative feedback for the venue, and that it'd not my job to decide who stays and who goes. THAT job belongs to the owner.

You mentioned that I have no idea what kind of hard work it takes to create a successful show and venue because I work in high end establishments. However, that's NOW. I have worked biker bars that made "Roadhouse" look like the ritz. I started when karaoke was done with lyric sheets. I have NEVER followed or attempted to take another host's venue. I ALWAYS start from scratch. I'm high end now, because I earned a rep for filling seats, a large net profit at the end of the night, and the ability to work in every sort of environment.


I cite experience only to explain WHY I know what's successful FOR ME, and then make suggestions that I hope will be helpful.
However, I also defer to others who have more experience than me in certain areas ( Knightshow, Lonman, Harryoke when he's here, The Enchantress, etc...).

It's not ego. These forums were all started as a way to learn from others.

This thread was about COVER CHARGES, which I don't believe in. I tried to avoid your "freeloader" rant for this thread, but you apparently attract so many that it's a big problem for you. I'm sorry about that, but it's not my fault, because it's not my show.

The general consensus regarding cover charges is that most don't go for it, per the posts. That means that whatever I say aside, it's a bad idea. That's the combined experience of those who answered.

My way works for me. Apparently your way ISN'T working so well for you. Don't listen to anything I say, but you might consider using the combined experience of those here on the forum to your benefit.

Take what info you can, use what you can. That info that you might not use: discard quietly and move on. No need to jump on someone who is trying to HELP you. The motivation is good. OK?

You've been at this a little over a year. I don't know how you studied it before you started, but I went to all of the best, most popular, and highest paid hosts' shows and observed. Then I went to them and asked questions. I did this for a LONG time. No one host was what I thought of as the total package. I took what I thought best from each, and discarded what I didn't use. After all of this, I started and soon learned that the only REAL teacher is diversified experience.

Eric, if you don't like my presentation, I'm sorry. I have never ment to be abrasive, only helpful. You don't want to read what I post- Don't. But do yourself a favor and learn from these other fine people. Stop being so sensitive. You'll gain from it.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."