Corporate sponsorship/bands dancing to the tune of promotional cash money

[editor]

Ed: My concern is for your debating style, which makes me not want to debate with you. Nothing personal in it, you're a nice guy, but when arguing on the internet, you turn into someone else. Sorry.

But why aren't you concerned about a poster turning up just to insult me while completely ignoring the topic?

You don't have to like my debating style, but I think you're being bang out of order here, but there you go.

 

[Crispy]

fine, I expected as much. like I said, sorry, but I thought I should explain my words. I'll leave it now. sorry everyone.

 

[killer b]

the rich sponsor the arts in order to look good/get some publicity/whatever. hasn't this always been the case?

i'm all for people refusing to take cash from the man - it's admirable, as is your choice not to take corporate dollar.

but who can blame someone for wanting to get paid?

 

[In Bloom]

You finally got a reaction to one of your little digs, so aren't you feeling proud of yourself?
I don't know, but it's worth discussing, no?

I can't say I was comfortable with the entire Reading Festival being rebranded as the Carling Weekend, but I guess it didn't bother some folks, just like some may not be bothered if this site became, "The Carling urban boards" or whatever.

I don't like the continuing encroachment of corporate sponsorship and branding everywhere and the growing acceptance of quite bizarre link-ins between products and acts, but that's just my thoughts.

Honestly, it makes very little difference to me whether or not an event already run as a business gets corporate sponsorship. As long as it doesn't effect the quality of the entertainment or the cost of a ticket, I couldn't give a toss.

Also those "Damn you, warm beer" t-shirts I got for working behind the bar at Leeds looked ace

 

[editor]

Honestly, it makes very little difference to me whether or not an event already run as a business gets corporate sponsorship. As long as it doesn't effect the quality of the entertainment or the cost of a ticket, I couldn't give a toss.

Well, that's fair enough, but given the choice, I'd always prefer to go to non-corporate festivals like EndorseIt and Indietracks, rather than ones where there's corporate logos slapped all over t'shop.

 

[Pie 1]

Seeing as I was reacting to someone turning up in this thread just to throw totally unprovoked personal abuse at me, I fail to see your concern at the matter.

Actually, to be fair I was turning up in this thread to post an opinion that was 100% provoked by your own post.
It wasn't particuarly personal either tbh, Just a statement of my opinion about your rather sanctimonious stance at that point in the thread - Y'know, like 100's of posters do to each other every day on this site.
Not my fault that you appear to still be wrestling with the whole opinion/abuse concept.

 

[clandestino]

"Dance for the corporate dollar" I think is (just, ever so) slightly on the harsh side.

Not all musicians have the business brain or network skills that you desire from them. Many i know are clueless and rely on agents, managers (hello to the 10-20% cut) to do that for them.

The real anger here should be directed to the labels (both major and indie) who have squandered fortunes and to opportunist product managers wanting to make get some cheap endorsement or to look cool.

That's interesting. Can you explain the label bit a bit more?

 

[editor]

<blah blah blah... more off topic patronising waffle>
Not my fault that you appear to still be wrestling with the whole opinion/abuse concept.

Any chance of you putting away your big stirring stick now and actually discussing the topic?

Oh, and to Crispy and others - sorry for losing my rag a bit. I've got rather a lot on my mind today.

 

[bluestreak]

the rich sponsor the arts in order to look good/get some publicity/whatever. hasn't this always been the case?

i'm all for people refusing to take cash from the man - it's admirable, as is your choice not to take corporate dollar.

but who can blame someone for wanting to get paid?

This is what I was going to say. in the end I'll give bonus points to anyone who goes it alone, but to condemn someone for taking a few quid to perform at a sponsored gig is a bit much for me. And sponsored gigs are different to doing adverts and product promotion, which is complete fail!

 

[In Bloom]

Well, that's fair enough, but given the choice, I'd always prefer to go to non-corporate festivals like EndorseIt and Indietracks, rather than ones where there's corporate logos slapped all over t'shop.

I can kind of understand, from a personal aesthetic point of view, even if I don't agree. I just think it's a mistake to get moralistic about it, there's no fundamental difference between a corporation and any other business, corporations just tend to be bigger.

 

[Pie 1]

Any chance of you putting away your big stirring stick.

 

[Dan U]

I can't say I was comfortable with the entire Reading Festival being rebranded as the Carling Weekend, but I guess it didn't bother some folks, just like some may not be bothered if this site became, "The Carling urban boards" or whatever.

that is pragmatism though, sadly.

it cost's so much money to put on a festival these days that sponsorship is often required. See the thread about the police demands for Recydrate The West in Festivals forum for a prime example.

I heard an interview with various festival organisers recently and they reckoned to set up a medium sized festival from scratch you need £1m and be prepared to not to break even for 2-3 years.

I think your angry at the players, not the game. i.e H&S, licensing, police etc.

 

[editor]

I just think it's a mistake to get moralistic about it, there's no fundamental difference between a corporation and any other business, corporations just tend to be bigger.

I'm trying not to get all 'moralistic' or tell bands what to do, but I'm just chewing the fat and having a little moan about the growing influence and acceptance of corporate branding. Like I said before, I don't blame the bands for taking the wedge, but I think I'd feel uncomfortable in the same position.

<more pointless stuff>

Seeing as you've clearly got nothing on-topic to add to this thread, why are you still here?

 

[twistedAM]

That's interesting. Can you explain the label bit a bit more?

Without getting libellous, no, but you know there's indie labels who are shit and mess artists around often not through any dark art but simply by blowing their trumpet and not delivering on financial promises such as tour support or even having the money to press the record on time.

 

[Crispy]

Without getting libellous, no, but you know there's indie labels who are shit and mess artists around often not through any dark art but simply by blowing their trumpet and not delivering on financial promises such as tour support or even having the money to press the record on time.

A friend of mine had this happen to him. They blew all their money on what they thought were going to be the next big thing, and didn't have enough left over to record his album. So he had to wait a whole year.

 

[editor]

A friend of mine had this happen to him. They blew all their money on what they thought were going to be the next big thing, and didn't have enough left over to record his album. So he had to wait a whole year.

We spent three months recording an album in the main room at the top notch Genetic Studios near Reading. Spent a fortune. The Orb did some remixes too.

Release date is currently - ooh - some 15 years overdue and counting.