PDA

View Full Version : How many weekender women pay for a ghost male?



Spin dryer
8th-March-2007, 12:59 AM
It seemed to me that at Storm that there were significantly more women than men, despite the balancing of the sexes. It occurs to me that one possible explanation could be that some women who missed the boat for female only bookings paid for themselves and a fictitious male. Has anyone done that?

Lynn
8th-March-2007, 01:08 AM
It seemed to me that at Storm that there were significantly more women than men, despite the balancing of the sexes. It occurs to me that one possible explanation could be that some women who missed the boat for female only bookings paid for themselves and a fictitious male. Has anyone done that?For Ceroc events it would be pretty easy for them to know whether this has happened or not and how often as each member of any booked party is supposed to turn up in person to have their male/female wristband fitted. So the organisers would surely know exactly how many, if any, women turned up without a man to collect the male wristband for their booking.

On an aside, it certainly seemed to be quieter this year, yet I believe the event was sold out. Does anyone know if numbers were reduced, or did some people book a cheap ticket and just turn up for the Saturday evening?

MartinHarper
8th-March-2007, 01:15 AM
Seemed to be more leaders in the handful of classes I went to. I'm not sure whether to blame the teachers for excess leader-focus, or the followers for not caring about becoming better dancers.

My expectation is that the event didn't "sell out", but rather that Ceroc stopped selling tickets a little before the final date for organisational reasons.
Also, note that Ceroc don't promise perfect 50/50 gender balance.

Ghost
8th-March-2007, 01:53 AM
I can assure you no women paid for me at Storm

I danced with some on Monday, but that was free

killingtime
8th-March-2007, 10:47 AM
Could we have the option "I've been a ghostly male at an event" please :D.

stewart38
8th-March-2007, 02:00 PM
It seemed to me that at Storm that there were significantly more women than men, despite the balancing of the sexes. It occurs to me that one possible explanation could be that some women who missed the boat for female only bookings paid for themselves and a fictitious male. Has anyone done that?

Id say 5% more women

Try Franco camber May 2004 or Nov 2004 for significantly more
In fact by 2/3am its back to hunt the lady

Anyway its fairly easy to abuse the system

All you need to do is know a name of a person going and just say your with them (assuming there not on there own) and turn up and stay elsewhere

Also lots of women could book for a man and women (£58 ?) and just go on there own or share with others of just walk on site

All fairly easy , there is no need to need to know names of others booking

Gadget
8th-March-2007, 02:06 PM
If anyone is considering this for any aberdeen events, I'm perfectly willing to take up ghost's place :innocent: (He get's about a bit dosn't he :what: )

gig·o·lo - Show Spelled Pronunciation[jig-uh-loh, zhig-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -los.
1. ~
2. a male professional dancing partner or escort.

Feelingpink
9th-March-2007, 12:15 AM
Could we also have the option: "I hadn't thought of booking a ghost male, but thanks for the idea?"


Cue lots of bookings with "Casper" as one of the dancers ...

Astro
9th-March-2007, 04:12 PM
Don't blame the women!
I know men who book accomodation for two men, except one has a fictitious name, and only one turns up.
This is because it is cheaper to pay for a shared room with a male ghost than it is to book single accomodation.
Until cheap single accomodation is offered, the gender balance will be ****-eyed.

Trouble
9th-March-2007, 04:16 PM
Don't blame the women!
.
Until cheap single accomodation is offered, the gender balance will be ****-eyed.

**** - eyed - there is a joke there somewhere.......must resist....must resist. :awe:

David Bailey
9th-March-2007, 04:40 PM
Don't blame the women!
I know men who book accomodation for two men, except one has a fictitious name, and only one turns up.
I thought there were rules against that?

Mind you, I'm not sure how they could be enforced...

Gentabout
9th-March-2007, 04:43 PM
I had an offer on the saturday night of being paid. Does that count?.

Had to turn it down of course, being a man of the cloth for the evening.





Gent.

Ps having a girlfriend was the first reason for turning her down, being a cardinal was just a bonus.

stewart38
9th-March-2007, 05:48 PM
Don't blame the women!
I know men who book accomodation for two men, except one has a fictitious name, and only one turns up.
This is because it is cheaper to pay for a shared room with a male ghost than it is to book single accomodation.
Until cheap single accomodation is offered, the gender balance will be ****-eyed.

NO blame ceroc for doing it !!

why should my friend pay £149 for a single room when he can pay £118 for say a two male or male /female room and just not have the other person there. I 'pretend' he has a friend

For god sake the fact he is a sad loner should be punishment enough rather then charging him extra to have his/her room :devil:

LMC
9th-March-2007, 05:58 PM
Agree that an organisation charging "singles" more than buying two tickets is shooting itself in the foot when trying to gender balance.

I think there were a few more women than men at Storm but didn't find it a major problem [shrug] - I got asked plenty as well as getting out there and doing the asking, it felt "balanced" in terms of effort :nice:

Lynn makes a good point - if people can get a single ticket for £29 then that's darn good value for a couple of workshops and a nearly-all-night freestyle on Saturday only and I wouldn't be surprised if a fair few people did this at Storm - IMO it was noticeably busier on Saturday than on Friday and Sunday. Although this could be the people who arrive late Fri/Sat am or leave early Sun am. BUt then they would be more likely to stay for the whole time if the tickets were more expensive. TBH, for £29 I would rather arrive Sat am and drive home Sun am and get than share with a stranger, and am strongly considering this for Storm next year and other Ceroc weekenders I may want to go to, but don't have enough leave for the Fri/Mon.

Astro
14th-March-2007, 12:37 PM
For god sake the fact he is a sad loner should be punishment enough rather then charging him extra to have his/her room :devil:

Or.....he may be hoping to lure someone back:innocent:

Hayles
14th-March-2007, 02:05 PM
I understand why ceroc want to even out the numbers of men and women for events like storm, but it can never be totally even.
Besides I am female (last time I checked) but I can also dance as a male and at storm I went to lessons as a "man" so that I could improve my repetoire, but danced as a lady most of the evening. So what's to say that just because someone is female that that is the role they will dance all weekend? You really regualte that kind of thing anyway.:sick:
Also I've seen plenty of guys dancing together, so at the end of the day there's always someone to dance with!:wink:

mick s
14th-March-2007, 03:59 PM
So why not give the customers what they want and break the weekend down into sections e.g.

Freestyle Nights only
Individual nights freestyle
Freestyle and classes

May prove logistically more difficult to organise but with some thought and careful pricing strategy could probably generate even more revenue than currently, whilst giving people more flexibility.

David Bailey
14th-March-2007, 04:34 PM
So why not give the customers what they want and break the weekend down into sections e.g.

Freestyle Nights only
Individual nights freestyle
Freestyle and classes
I think Ceroc are starting to play with this concept by introducing Utopia / Non-Utopia sections?

But yes, a more "pay-as-you-go" approach might well be more lucrative. Of course, it's easy for us to say that, making it work is the hard part.

Lynn
14th-March-2007, 05:26 PM
I think Ceroc are starting to play with this concept by introducing Utopia / Non-Utopia sections?

But yes, a more "pay-as-you-go" approach might well be more lucrative. Of course, it's easy for us to say that, making it work is the hard part.I don't actually like that idea. I like the fact that when I get to a weekender I can just decide to attend/watch whatever workshops I feel like, go and dance in whatever rooms I feel like, depending on my mood. The 'pay for access to part of the venue only' bit means I either have to decide in advance whether I want to any classes - while not knowing what classes are on offer or who the teachers are - or pay the full amount, then end up not doing any classes etc anyway and feeling I've 'overpaid'.

I know, illogical. But that's me. And I have to admit the two level thing at Breeze has been a factor in putting me off booking. But I'm probably the only one, everyone else probably thinks its a great idea.

David Bailey
14th-March-2007, 06:03 PM
I know, illogical. But that's me. And I have to admit the two level thing at Breeze has been a factor in putting me off booking. But I'm probably the only one, everyone else probably thinks its a great idea.
I think that "all-inclusive" deals seem to be going out of fashion slowly, in some areas at least, as the "pricing management" technology improves - e.g. digital telly pricing.

Ideally, a pay-as-you-go approach could mean that the overall quality of each "component" would improve - because if it's no good, no-one will pay for it (in the same way that buffet meals are generally less good quality than a la carte).

Of course, that also means that popular classes will be seen as good classes, which is not always the case - some areas are just niche...

Lynn
14th-March-2007, 08:00 PM
I think that "all-inclusive" deals seem to be going out of fashion slowly, in some areas at least, as the "pricing management" technology improves - e.g. digital telly pricing.

Ideally, a pay-as-you-go approach could mean that the overall quality of each "component" would improve - because if it's no good, no-one will pay for it (in the same way that buffet meals are generally less good quality than a la carte).

Of course, that also means that popular classes will be seen as good classes, which is not always the case - some areas are just niche...I don't care if its going out of fashion or not. I like the 'turn up and everything's included, decide each day what I want to do in terms of rooms to dance in and classes on offer' of current weekender formats.

And I don't like having to decide whether or not I want to pay for classes before I find out who is teaching what.

David Bailey
14th-March-2007, 08:22 PM
I don't care if its going out of fashion or not. I like the 'turn up and everything's included, decide each day what I want to do in terms of rooms to dance in and classes on offer' of current weekender formats.
Sorry - "fashion" was a poor word.

I meant to say "business trend" or something - i.e. businesses know they can make more money overall if they levy a lot of small charges rather than one big one, because customers are given choice.

And yes, all-inclusive does save you from having to make too many choices - on the other hand, there's no quality control. I mean, I went to a weekender where Amir was teaching Jango at 9am Sat and 9am Sun - what sort of quality is that?


And I don't like having to decide whether or not I want to pay for classes before I find out who is teaching what.
Well, I doubt it'll happen any time soon - it's clearly a major organisational challenge, and obviously you don't want to make it hard work for the attendees, or stress them out. But I think some increased granularity in organisation may be a trend...

Degodier
14th-March-2007, 09:02 PM
why should my friend pay £149 for a single room when he can pay £118 for say a two male or male /female room and just not have the other person there. I 'pretend' he has a friend


:confused: I think that actually if you book a ghost person you are effectively paying more for the same standard than you would as a singleton.:confused: If I book as a single woman sharing it's £69. If booking with a ghost man it's £138. Quite a hike. If I didn't want to share it would only be an extra £30, so that would be worth it if you were desperate I guess.

Of course there are some men out there I would happily pay the extra £69 for..... I'm sure there's a dubious joke there somewhere.....

In the meantime we girls have to be very quick off the mark when booking!! The last Jive Time one I went to was hugely over on women, 30 something women over in one class I went to and a scrum for dances on the freestyles. :sad: Needless to say I left the class. I won't be booking another weekender with them, but I would if I was a bloke!:wink:

Lynn
15th-March-2007, 12:57 AM
Well, I doubt it'll happen any time soon - it's clearly a major organisational challenge, and obviously you don't want to make it hard work for the attendees, or stress them out. But I think some increased granularity in organisation may be a trend...It already is. People booking Breeze can opt to pay (I think) £20 less but for that you aren't allowed to do any workshops or have any access to the main room for dancing. That's the idea, to offer a discount I suppose, but to me it also means you pay £20 more if you want to do classes - but there are no details available about the classes or who is teaching etc.


In the meantime we girls have to be very quick off the mark when booking!! The last Jive Time one I went to was hugely over on women, 30 something women over in one class I went to and a scrum for dances on the freestyles. :sad: Needless to say I left the class. I won't be booking another weekender with them, but I would if I was a bloke!:wink:To be fair to Jivetime - it would still be possible to have 30 women over in a class at a weekender even if relatively well gender balanced - if its a class that has 500 people in it and more women decide to do it than men.

Agree about the scrum at freestyle. Being shy wee thing :innocent: I'm not quick enough off the mark for some of the guys I want to dance with most of the time anyway, never mind having to wade through a layer of women 3 deep round the edge of the dance floor.

bigdjiver
15th-March-2007, 03:27 PM
I think that "all-inclusive" deals seem to be going out of fashion slowly, in some areas at least, as the "pricing management" technology improves - e.g. digital telly pricing.

Ideally, a pay-as-you-go approach could mean that the overall quality of each "component" would improve - because if it's no good, no-one will pay for it (in the same way that buffet meals are generally less good quality than a la carte).

Of course, that also means that popular classes will be seen as good classes, which is not always the case - some areas are just niche...The organisers should be taking note of numbers and responses to classes anyway, the feedback from pay-by-class should not be required.

The one payment model allows for more innovation. The punters do not have to guess whether something completely new will be worth the money, they can sample it for no extra charge.

stewart38
15th-March-2007, 03:32 PM
:confused: I think that actually if you book a ghost person you are effectively paying more for the same standard than you would as a singleton.:confused: If I book as a single woman sharing it's £69. If booking with a ghost man it's £138. Quite a hike. If I didn't want to share it would only be an extra £30, so that would be worth it if you were desperate I guess.



sorry figs quoted we fact as of now

David Bailey
15th-March-2007, 05:22 PM
The organisers should be taking note of numbers and responses to classes anyway, the feedback from pay-by-class should not be required.
More feedback is always useful - plus, it's not fair to compare numbers of a class at 9am on a Sunday morning with a "primetime" class at 5pm on a Sat afternoon...


The one payment model allows for more innovation. The punters do not have to guess whether something completely new will be worth the money, they can sample it for no extra charge.
Associating monetary values with items is a good measure of quality - that's what we do with pretty much everything else in life. And more ganularity gives more information about which specific areas are valuable.

WittyBird
15th-March-2007, 11:59 PM
a scrum for dances on the freestyles. :sad:

I've never found it a "Scrum" on the dance floor at any weekenders.


Needless to say I left the class

Never do the classes so can't comment. :rolleyes:


I won't be booking another weekender with them

:clap: Another woman less :clap:
My work here is done :whistle:

bigdjiver
16th-March-2007, 01:51 AM
More feedback is always useful - plus, it's not fair to compare numbers of a class at 9am on a Sunday morning with a "primetime" class at 5pm on a Sat afternoon... It seems to me equally unfair to compare revenues from classes at those times.



Associating monetary values with items is a good measure of quality - that's what we do with pretty much everything else in life. And more ganularity gives more information about which specific areas are valuable.monetery valus reflect demand, which is based upon marketing and experience. People do not know how good a class will be until after it is over, but they had to pay before it started.

Lump sum prepayment means that novel classes and new teachers can be introduced and it carries no monetary penalty for the attendees to try them. This is one reason why weekenders have so improved the scene for those that never attend them as well as those that do.