Quote:
mrscott
What is an acceptable crowd?
Reply to topic Reply with quote Go to the bottom
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:28 am
..............................................edited out.............................................
I know the bottom line is the z-tape totals, not the amount of singers or patrons. Water drinkers don't add to the bottom line, but they DO add to the show itself, if they participate. Not to mention the designated drivers, who also might be water drinkers. So, considering an average mix of drinkers/non-drinkers, how many people attending (not necessarily participating in karaoke) does it take to make it worth while for the bar/venue to be profitable? Thats what its all about really, isn't it?
In an attempt to make known the potential consequences of singing freeloaders at karaoke shows, I have been accused of "whining". Actually, the typical respondents to my posts are the ones who are the "whiners", IMHO. And while I am not sure, I have some ideas about why my posts generate such strong responses.
Throughout my posts, I have never told anyone that they have a problem. I have never suggested that I needed advice from anyone on how to handle the problem; it wasn't mine to handle directly, I was solely a singer when my posts regarding freeloaders began.
And I shared with the forum that as a singer my response to the situation, eventually, was to take my money elsewhere! So, five freeloaders resulted in me and other paying customers leaving!
And for the last time, with no real expectation of getting a rational response, I ask why do so many of you condone and/or excuse the bad behavior of the freeloaders described in my discussions? I have continually ASKED this question, to no avail!
What I find most curious is why anyone should have any argument with me? Those who are desirous of arguing clearly ignore the reality that they are disagreeing with a statement that can't be debated ---- I HAVE WITNESSED FREELOADERS WHO FOLLOW THEIR FRUGAL ROUTINE WEEK IN AND WEEK OUT.... If you would like, you can call me a liar regarding that statement!
But what is there in THAT statement which you would like to debate?
Most hilarious are the justifications that have been provided as to why those non-spenders might be freeloading. The above referenced post, which started a new thread, UNEQUIVOCALLY states that
Water drinkers don't add to the bottom line, but they DO add to the show itself, if they participate.
What does the poster mean when he states that water drinkers add to the show itself? And to me, "adding to the show" is not a valid criteria for overlooking freeloaders. And how does any one know that they add to the show when they participate? But, surely, they add to the rotation and the wait time of the paying singers!
And there have been many others who have made the similar claim that freeloaders can be beneficial! Meanwhile, it is my opinion, generally speaking, that freeloading singers actually detract from the experience of the other singers. And, for me, personally.... I'd rather that they not take up space in the rotation!
So, we clearly have those who ASSUME singing freeloaders are a benefit. And there are posters who will always provide hypothetical justifications for freeloaders and how they are (ALWAYS) a benefit.
But what if they are not ALWAYS a benefit? When do they become something less? And what do they "become" after they are no longer PERCEIVED as a benefit to the show and to the venue?
And who, in the first place, do they benefit? Do they benefit the Host, the other singers, the audience or the owner? And if they benefit the owner, by how much do they improve the bottom line? And how many freeloaders does it take to improve the bottom line? One? Two? Or does it require several freeloaders before the total impact of their activities take effect? And, is anyone really confident in the assertion that people NOT spending money improves the bottom line?
In short, it has seemingly become fashionable on this forum to justify freeloading, even those who admit they have no direct knowledge and/or experience with are experts regarding it!
It is also fashionable in this country to ascribe to those in the entertainment industry LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE views of society. Some have even been labeled socialists!
And some would say that we are in the entertainment field! Hmmm?
Dennis Miller: the comedian, entertainer and talk-show host is a conservative in a community that is predominantly at odds with what he believes. And recently he adeptly expressed this personal truth!
"I don't mind helping the helpless, but I have no intention of helping the clueless".
Socialists share the wealth with both the hopeless and clueless. Unequal inputs into the communal pool derive EQUAL outputs for all participants!
I am a capitalist. I will help the helpless, but not the useless, clueless, malingerer, deadbeat, etc.
And to me the clueless are those who show up at karaoke and don't think they need to spend money, along with those who condone and or justify said behavior, in effect, facilitating it so that it continues to the detriment (NOT BENEFIT) of all.
And why are there KJ's who won't do anything about it?
Maybe the KJ is not really a capitalist at heart?
Maybe the KJ knows the freeloaders on a personal level and are embarrassed to do the "right thing" and point out their bad behavior?
Maybe the KJ lacks the confidence to lose an entertaining singer believing that the net effect on the show would be detrimental rather than positive if the singer were invited to leave?
Maybe the KJ freeloads and is embarrassed to "point a finger" at someone else?
Maybe the KJ is a known freeloader and can't "point the finger" elsewhere?
Maybe the KJ personally invited the singer to return, not realizing at first that the singer hasn't been spending much?
NOTE: Everyone who attended the show I described back two years ago, freeloaders and non-freeloaders alike, got a phone call from the KJ each week to make sure we were showing up!