Fair Play For Live Entertainment Venues

Fair Play for Live Entertainment Venues

Dear friends of the live entertainment industry,

Your help is needed to provide an equitable entertainment industry in South Australia. This industry needs to be separate for all people to enjoy if it’s to exist in a fair playing field. Currently, the state of our music industry, which once was a thriving, developing and inspirational industry, is competing for an audience that has forgotten that ‘entertainment’ has many facets, not merely gaming.

The premise of this message is not to debate the existence of, or removal of, gaming in S.A., but rather it is to separate live entertainment from gaming and to provide greater equity between all venues and their participants.

To some this may sound radical as well as discriminatory, however many of the articles you may read in our ‘blogs’ will provide evidence to support the argument that live music, and live entertainment in general, has been displaced by pokies in S.A.

In 1992 the Act to allow gaming machines into S.A. was passed to endeavor to create an even playing field for venues. Now in 2007 that Act has protected those who have acquired gaming entitlements, whilst disadvantaging those who have not, even more so since the gaming freeze. This freeze was needed to combat the social and economic conditions facing the community today. These conditions are further discussed in the articles in our 'blogs'. Gaming has caused a shift in the principles of some venue owners that originally were set up for live entertainment and saw it as their main business staple. In order to survive and compete, these owners were forced to compromise and faced conflicting moral and ethical choices, as detailed in some of the reports.

There are more bands in S.A. now than in 1992, however, even with the increase of gaming venues there are less opportunities for most bands to find venues in which to perform and particularly more difficult for original bands. The few entertainment venues that remain, do so merely by principle to support live music/entertainment. These venues also promote a platform for emerging and unsigned artists which provides artist development for many performers especially for those under 18.

By separating live entertainment from gaming we aim to offer an attractive, measurable recovery to an ailing industry and fully restore the live trade for its performers, audience and venues.

You can do your bit to help by simply replying to us here or via email at [email protected] and saying you support this action.

Include your name, occupation and a reply email address.

Comments are most welcome

A Message from Monty

The basis of my proposal is to create a fair and even playing field within all clubs and hotels achieved by methodically separating gaming from entertainment. By its very nature this proposal is simple and common sense based. The move will address a number of fundamental issues facing the artists and also those facing the public sector of the community, namely problem gamblers. Making the choice between live entertainment or gaming remains obvious and positively drives the public to either one or the other. The negative affect gaming has within the community is well-known, so it is warranted that we provide some solutions or suggestions as opposed to doing nothing. This proposal is not without its complexities, even though it is simple to understand, however, the live industry is competing for disposal income, something that was not such a problem before the introduction of EGMs in the pubs and clubs, and now exclusive to those licensees who own them. That is unfair. The conditioning that has occurred as a result of EGMs has most definitely supported cover acts more so than original acts, how is this fair? Bearing in mind that I am myself a participant of that forum. A live venue does not mean that the program has to be original or covers, but merely whatever the paying public are willing to pay for. Some will prefer to mix the genres and other will choose to specialise but all venues will have a fair and level playing field. Further, a separate live industry will increase demand, encourage supply and better revenue. In my opinion, this makes it fair, equitable and measurable for the operators, the artists, suppliers and ultimately promotes a better live industry.

Sandra Kanck speaks to The Legislative Council about the effect of pokies on live entertainment

Leader of Australian Democrats SA Sandra Kanck made the following speech to the Legislative Council on Wednesday 12th September 2007.

Poker machines are killing the music! Live music was a political issue a few years ago because of the encroachment of inner city living upon entertainment venues, but once again live music is under threat, this time because of the cross subsidies of poker machines. Many people will know that I have taken a very much ..live and let live' approach to poker machines and the industry that they have spawned. In some cases, I have seen that two or three poker machines have been able to stop an individual business from closing down. However, one of the consequences of the huge profitability of poker machines is the capacity this gives to the owner of those machines to cross subsidise other aspects of the business, such as being able to offer alcoholic drinks at a lower price than entertain­ment outlets that do not have the financial advantage that accrues with having poker machines.

I maintain my great concern that we as a society tolerate, and even encourage, the pushing of that legal drug, alcohol. However, it is in regard to live music that I am becoming increasingly concerned. Because of that aforementioned cross subsidy, some outlets—for example, the casino—are able to offer free entertainment to patrons. The flip side of that coin is that, because those venues without poker machines do not have the capacity to cross subsidise, they are at a competitive disadvantage because they still have to have a cover charge. If you combine that cover charge with more expensive alcohol, you can guess where the patrons will flock—obviously, to the place with free entertainment and cheaper alcohol, with those businesses also having an agenda to have those people wander in and play the pokies while they are at it.

Without the clientele, it means that the viability of the non-pokies venues is threatened which, in turn, means fewer outlets for local live music to be performed. This threat is now being exacerbated by the takeover of a number of significant and popular hotels in metropolitan Adelaide by the Woolworths cartel. We do not have a level playing field here, and there are some very interesting trade practices and competition policy issues in the current situation. It certainly does not take an economics degree to see the potential outcome in the longer term.

With market power, these owners of multiple proper­ties will be able to out-spend the non-pokie operators in getting their message out to attract young people. This is shown quite clearly with the lifestyle advertising of the casino, which clearly targets 18 to 25 year olds with its offers of $1 drinks at happy hours. Put simply, they can wear down the small players. In the short term the big players can pay out more for entertainment until the small players, who will not be able to compete on any of the levels—the price of alcohol, the cover charge or the payment to the bands—just go out of existence. Once any competition, however small, has been sidelined, the big operators will be able to put pressure on the musicians to accept lower and lower rates.

It is, I think, more than coincidence that many top Australian bands are coming out of Western Australia: Eskimo Joe, Snowman, Little Birdy, The Sleepy Jackson and Birds of Tokyo being some examples. In Western Australia there are no poker machines and they have a very energetic live music industry. It is where the talent scouts are now going, and South Australia misses out. We need to take action because, in the past two years alone, 140 venues have discounted their support for live music. For many of them having poker machines is enough; they no longer need the attraction of a band.

The Rann government claims it supports live music, yet it is turning a blind eye to what is happening as a conse­quence of the pokies industry. What is it doing to assist these small, non-pokies venues that promote live music? This government reaps increasing amounts of revenue from poker machines. Currently it is channelling only $500 000 per annum of this back to support live music. That is just one small action, but a lot more is needed. The live music scene of Adelaide is not yet dead, but it will need the creative intervention by government to sustain it.

Thanks everybody for supporting fair play for live entertainment venues. We love your work!

Your comments are most welcome, however we do have to ask people to refrain from advertising this is because we are now gearing up for political support. The objective of this profile is to demonstrate the unfair playing fields which currently exist and to collect information via testimonial in order to give evidence of a displaced music industry by gaming. I ask you kindly to refrain from advertising, in order to help us sort out everyones‘s comments for political parties to peruse.