Pay-to-play (was; my response)

[Brian Sammon]

> I have occasionally gotten tickets for friends for shows, but if a
> promoter asked me to sell tickets for him, I'd probably just laugh. It
> would be totally unprofessional. If a promoter isn't going to take
> responsibility to *promote* when why would a musician need him at all?
> 
> The most fundamental job of a promoter job is to *promote*  in order
> that people show up at the show. There are also the other jobs of
> making sure the venue is booked and ready, making sure that there is a
> sound man, paying the band, supplying food and a place to sleep,
> travel accommodations, etc. but all those can be negotiable. However,

Whose job is it to book/rent the venue, and set up the sound?  I'm not being 
snarky, but I'm wondering if we're caught in a semantic argument here.  These 
sound like two essential jobs, and whoever does/funds them is making an 
investment of time and money.  It's generally this person/company who stands 
to make a profit or lose money depending on how attendance is.
This person/company, whether we call them "promoter" or "organizer" or 
"investor" or something else, is doing an important job by securing the venue 
and setting up the sound, whether or not they "promote" well.  And they aren't 
"hired" for the job.  (They may, if they are able/willing to invest more 
money, hire other people to do part of the job)

I think a lot of us would agree that if you don't bother to promote well, or 
expect the bands to promote, you shouldn't call yourself a "promoter".