TubeNet

The following is the press release for an orchestra of which I'm a proud member. It is not a very busy orchestra with just a few services a year, but it is a professional orchestra in a community that truly loves and deserves the ensemble. Weather was actually the last straw that placed us in this position (yay Canadian weather!).

-----

The Brantford Symphony Orchestra’s 2007-08 Season now on the verge of collapse financially!!!

January 14, 2008 – For Immediate Release

Despite a proud and rich history of 54 continuous years of providing live symphonic music in Brantford , the BSO cannot presently fund the remainder of the 2007-08 Concert Season.

The concerts originally scheduled for Sunday, February 17th (50 Years of Rock and Roll, with Guest Artists the Jeans ‘n Classics Band) and Sunday, April 13th (Haydn’s The Creation, with the Grand River Chorus) will not be presented UNLESS we are able to secure immediate and substantial financial support from our community. With regret, The Young Persons’ Concert, initially scheduled for Wednesday, April 02nd has been cancelled in an effort to salvage the rest of the season.


Why:

Due to the costs to produce and present high-quality, fully-professional concerts that the citizens of Brantford and surrounding areas have come to expect the BSO has sought increased funding from the community it serves. The problem… that money has not been forthcoming.


Solution:

The Board of Directors is now faced with the challenging task of raising significant guaranteed working capital or there will not be a conclusion to our season.



The Bottom Line:

We need to raise a minimum of $30,000 by January 31st in order to present the February concert. An additional $60,000 is required by February 29th in order to present the April concert while also maintaining operations throughout this period of time.


What If:

Failure to achieve these hard targets by these deadlines will force the Board of Directors to cancel these concerts outright and suspend operations indefinitely.

All new monies raised under this urgent appeal will be held in trust. Put simply, if these targets are not met or surpassed by the deadlines set forth, all new monies will be returned, with no loss of capital to those willing to help.

Beyond 2007-08:

The Brantford Symphony Orchestra’s Board of Directors will be assessing how best to move the organization forward in a way that allows us to be more financially sustainable in the future while putting an orchestra on stage that the community will support. Your ideas and input are most welcome – please feel free to share them with us!

How To Help:

Your donation, sponsorship or purchase of tickets will let us know that you care. No amount is too small… if every citizen in our community contributes just $1, we will surpass our campaign target. The Sanderson Centre’s Box Office (519-758-8090) has also kindly agreed to accept donations (minimum of $10) on our behalf. Please… contact us at the BSO Office at 519-759-8781 to let us know how you can help… before it is too late!

-----

Thanks so much to anyone who helps us monetarily or by just passing-on this information and discussing it.

My own email address is: toobist@rogers.com
Please feel free to contact me should you have any other means to help.

To donate, visit: https://www.canadahelps.org/DonationDetails.aspx

and their mailing address is:

Brantford Symphony Orchestra
185 King George Rd
Brantford, ON Canada
N3R 7X3

Just an update for those of you who might be following this...

I got a message from the president of the Brantford Symphony and our February concert is saved. Here's the message:

*****
Great news!

Based on all donations received to the end of this week, as of this morning we are now able to confirm that the February Concert is able to proceed as originally planned. All required funds have been secured to guarantee this production can move forward.

Special thanks (with huge hugs and kisses - xxxooo) to the BSO's Women's Committee for convening an Emergency Meeting of their memebership Thursday and literally 'cashing in all their chips' in a desparate effort to help save our season. Their significant contribution has wiped them out while ensuring that the February Concert is now a go!!!

I have phoned Peter Brennan, of Jeans 'n Classics and Dan Warren, our conductor, to give them the good news. Glenn has also spoken with FM Systems to ensure the booking is confirmed for the Tech Support that we require; all is a go there too.

So... it's onward and upward... Next hurdle to overcome is The April Concert...

Derek, on behalf of The Board of Directors

*****

Thanks to all of you who have responded and followed this. It's not a busy orchestra in the least but the musicians who play there are some of the finest in the business. I consider myself very, very lucky to be a part of it.

Toobist wrote:Just an update for those of you who might be following this...

I got a message from the president of the Brantford Symphony and our February concert is saved. . . .

I'm glad your orchestra can go on. There must be a lot of teamwork in your group.

It never hurts non-profit members to meet and develop a mission statement. This should be a group project, not just one person's idea. Why is the non-profit organization there, and how does it perform its mission?

Then follow on with a business plan that accounts for such things as musicians, audiences, competition, alternative entertainment options for the audiences, performance venues, equipment, and salaries and transportation expenses.

--

tofu wrote:In my city we have a Cultural Fund that is funded by a small 1/4% tax on restaurant meals in the downtown area. The idea being that the Arts in the downtown area bring folks in to eat so in effect one hand washes the other. Our budget is funded by this as is the Riverwalk in our downtown area. There are probably 35 different groups that receive part of their funding from this fund. Everything from our river walk, music groups, dance , scultpture etc. Groups apply for funding every year. This was started several years ago and has been hugely successful both in the amount of money raised and dispersed. It has been good for the Arts, but also for the businesses. A win-win situation. Perhaps something your city and others might want to think about. Over the years we have had to refine it as groups from way outside the city that had nothing to do with our downtown or even the arts wanted in on the money. Even homeless groups many miles outside of our city claimed they were "cultural groups". The city has stayed true to the original intent but has had some interesting discussions on what is culture!

Although I believe in the arts and support them on a personal basis. I'm afraid I cannot agree with your above statement. First of all, how is it a "win-win" situation when people are forced to contribute to the fund, whether or not they have any interest in what is offered in return. Are the arts projects(concerts, whatever) offered free? Or are people they forced to contribute more money in order to receive the product? How fair is this?

Certainly, I find this much more palatable than I find the building of stadiums and arenas so that pro sports are able to pay players huge salaries for those that are interested in attending the games. I live in San Antonio where we have the "World Champion"(actually, NBA champion) San Antonio Spurs. The City of San Antonio shelled out millions of dollars to build the arena in which they play. I, by the way, voted against this money grab. I cannot afford to buy a ticket to their games. If I were to attend and sit in the nosebleed section, it wouldn't be cheap, and I probably couldn't see the game, anyway. This money grab was sold to the fine citizens of San Antonio as a tax on those of you who come to our city as tourists. I don't agree with this.

Let's look at another side of the issue. As I read your post, you mention those that wish to abuse the admirable effort to support the arts. This action is entirely predictable. If there is sufficient money available, there will be those who will attempt to collect it.

In short, I really doubt it is fair to say you have a win-win situation. What you have is a win-win situation for people such as you and me. It is a losing proposition to those that have no interest in what is going on.

--

tofu wrote: Yes everything is free.

If your community is happy with this, I'm happy for all of you. This is your business, not mine. You certainly have the freedom to do this under our governmental system. I still have to take issue with the statement I have quoted you as saying. This is simply not possible.

There is a debate raging in Evansville, Indiana these days concerning what to do with an aging municipal stadium that 'only' 10,000. Promoters are whining that they cannot book bigger entertainment unless they can seat at least 14,000 people yet THEY are not the ones willing to pay for the new facility. Frankly, I don't give a damn since Leon Redbone usually plays to houses with less than 1,000 seats.

I say the promoters and ball teams (those who prosper from ripping off large crowds) should be the ones to foot the bill.

As far as the local symphony is concerned... if they have something to offer, I buy a ticket.

--

tofu wrote: It can't be any fun trying to raise money at the last minute to fund a concert.

At last a point on which we can agree.

I'm the first to agree that we pay too many taxes. More importantly, "too many taxes," for many, IMHO, carries negative connotations not only for the hand in our pockets but also for the frustration we feel in light of poor fiscal management. Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere" is a shining example of pork barrel allocation.

But I certainly support the idea of a tax that supports municipal aesthetics, especially if it supports the arts. I don't know if it's still true, but long ago I read that the city of Berlin spends more on the arts in a single year than our National Endowment for the Arts. So how can we complain that our culture doesn't appreciate the arts when we see cities spend more building a single stadium than, again, probably what the NEA has for its annual budget. We, as a country, don't pay for the arts; how can we be surprised when they languish? We live in a culture of marketing. Popular culture is not determined by what's actually popular but rather by what is said to be popular. And like the proverbial lambs, we, as a culture at large, follow. For Pete's sake, do that many people actually care and want to hear about Britney friggin' Spears every single day?!? Popular culture is determined by whomever foots the marketing bill.

The League of American Orchestras (formerly, the American Symphony Orchestra League) would be wise to follow the model of the NBA, which took a languishing sport, far from the most popular, and with a persistent marketing campaign turned it into a multi-billion-dollar corporation (of sorts). As a corporation, their "product" is people bouncing a ball. And they've managed to get people to pay hand-over-fist to watch it and buy the shirts and shorts they wear while doing it. Not to offend basketball fans (I've always preferred playing it to watching it), but it's really kind of funny if you think about it.

As far as the tax argument, for anything that benefits the civil congregation, if the people within that group agree by vote, they can support anything. Whether everyone should be obliged, I have to say yes. Many components of any macroeconomy contribute to the health of that system, and the more developed and balanced it is, the more of a draw it is to people and businesses, from which any resident may benefit. An argument made by Ellwood Cubberly in 1904, regarding taxation for schools, rings as true for any civil tax. I don't remember the exact quote (Ed. Policy Studies 201, 198X), but essentially, you can argue that if you've never been robbed, you shouldn't have to pay for the police, and if your house has never caught fire, it's ridiculous for you to have to support the fire department. Because they're in place, you reap a benefit. Your house may never burn, (G-d) willing, but the fire dept. may keep the fire at your neighbor's house from spreading to yours.

We all want to see orchestras thrive, but as long as they continue to work off a 100-year-old product model, it's going to be tough. Orchestras really run more like a profit-turning business, but most function as non-profits. That's a fundamental disconnect. They produce a product (concerts), require manpower (musicians), manufacturing facilites (concert halls), have to take care of FICA, health insurance, etc., and have to market and advertise to get consumers to buy the product. If not enough consumers are buying the product, any good company will evaulate, because their ability to thrive depends on it, whether the issue is with the marketing - maybe consumers don't know about the product - or the product - it may be that consumers know and don't care for the product.

Orchestras don't seem to work from that angle. I've heard some things come out of people's mouths that made me think, "If you were any other business, you'd be out of business within the year." I don't know if the non-profit mentality is it, or what.

Orchestra management usually makes the mistake from the top-down. They hire conductors for all the wrong reasons. People who have no business doing so insist they need to be involved in the artistic direction of the group. Then they wonder why things aren't going right. From a product-based business point of view, there are numerous things that wouldn't fly in other situations.

Short story long, if we want the situation to change, we have to change it. Vote, get involved, get other people to vote.

Hmmm.....thinking.... all the debates so far....how many times have I heard them discuss issues about the arts...
...hmm...nothing comes to mind...

I believe the issue lies not with the concept of the tax as much as how it, or any tax, is spent. If we want something, we have to pay for it. We have to tell people about it, and keep telling them about it. If we need to, we need to go knocking on doors. We need to do advertising that's beyond the snooze-ville scenario most orchestras use now (The exquisite, the divine, the...yada yada yada). We need to change perceptions that "Classical" music is only for "relaxing," and something to put on the radio to help you fall asleep.

I hate to say it, but I can't see the current model lasting the century. The "Art Music" (as I like to call it) industry is on the verge of getting passed by, as they are failing to participate in the popular culture they once nearly controlled. Will they go the way of the carriage and steam engine, or will they find a way to transition?

I have yet to see an orchestra in trouble that didn't have a hand in its own demise, just like any other business. Poor choices, poor execution, poor management, fiscal mismanagement; one, some or all of those things usually contribute. When an orchestra finishes a season in the red, then plans for a full season for the next year, how do they expect things to be different? If you run any business hoping that someone's going to come along and just give you all the money you need to cover your shortfall, ...I mean, c'mon! How does that possibly make sound business sense? But how many orchestras have done just that?

In any industry, if many, many businesses and corporations are experiencing difficulty moving product, how long do they usually continue pushing that product? They may try a big marketing campaign for a push, just in case sluggish sales are the result of obscurity in the marketplace. Otherwise, they drop the product or transition to a different version or something else entirely before it drags the company under. When was the last time you walked into a piano showroom and saw a square grand? When was the last time you saw a refrigerator that required a big block of ice to keep it cold?

I rant with no intention of casting dispersions on any particular orchestra. But to stand back and evaluate, if so many orchestras are experiencing common difficulties, perhaps it's time to acknowledge that something's not right.

/end rant/

Mitch wrote:Hmmm.....thinking.... all the debates so far....how many times have I heard them discuss issues about the arts... hmm...nothing comes to mind...

Great point! If the arts are a reflection of society as a whole, where does that put us!?

windshieldbug wrote:

Mitch wrote:Hmmm.....thinking.... all the debates so far....how many times have I heard them discuss issues about the arts... hmm...nothing comes to mind...

Great point! If the arts are a reflection of society as a whole, where does that put us!?

Most of us know the answer, I'm afraid. We just don't really want to hear it.