I know of one club who tried this years ago , they offered free admission to dancers they perceived as "key dancers". Needless to say word got out, that some "hot shots" were getting in free , this *** off those who had to pay, so it rather backfiredOriginally Posted by Bubble
Exactly what happens at my current favourite venue. My other 2 regular venues are fine if I'm taxi-ing or want to practise leading. But when I want a venue where I know I'm going to get fab dances all night with my favourite dancers, then it's the other venue I go to.
On further thought I think the movement of dancers between different venues probably occurs at more than one level and in several stages. I agree that at the more experienced level women will 'flock to get a few good dances in' with some of the better leaders. However, what happens when so many women leave a venue that the remaining women become outnumbered (honestly, it can happen!!). In that case I think the men will be a lot less accepting of the situation than when it is the other way around. Why? Because men are not accustomed to sitting out for several dances at a time making chit-chat while they wait for someone to dance with; men generally expect to be outnumbered and will move on if the odds are against them.
I believed that too, but had the opportunity to run stats. The results are variable, and it definitely is not just about numbers, but, surprisingly, men, in general, appear to be more tolerant of being in the minority, are less numbers sensitive.
I believe the reason for this is that men are more willing to ask for dances, so, even if outnumbered, they stand more chance of getting a dance with their favourites.
Do you not think it's a little unfair to directly target another venues dancers??? Especially on the same night within a 20min drive...
aah capitalism - doncha hate it
I know you have just made your very first post but I like you already. You still believe that the concept of fairness exists between businesses and that the dance world, outside the world of the fluffiness of the actual dancers, is a warm, happy, fluffy place full of love and mutual support. I really wish that I could go back to believing in that. I envy you.
It is true that between some organisers there is a degree of cooperation and staying off each others patch but in the main it seems that the dance business is like any other business - as red in tooth and claw as the Serengeti plains.
Each of the parties will have their own view. One side saying that the other is "stealing my dancers" while the other says "I am offering advanced lessons that my competitor does not". Sometimes the average punter gets the best of both worlds in that each of the competitors provides something they want. Sometimes it all goes bad with both competitors being unable to make money and shutting down leaving the punter with nothing. Usually one business toughs it out until the other folds and then trys to recoup their losses.
Fair? I don't believe a sense of fairness exists in business. A sense of survival does. Sometimes us humble punters get to see a side of our hobby that we would rather not see. We sometimes forget that what is a hobby to us is a livelhood to others.
Just my opinion though.
When setting up a new venue, finding an appropriate venue in the geographical area targeted is the first and (often) hardest hurdle. Once one is found it is quite often only available on certain nights. Sometimes that may be the only choice and may clash with an existing, established club - in other words, you can't just assume that it is intentional.
Setting up a new venture is hard, hard work and expensive. There is personal risk and so one would do what ever they feel is within their own morals to try and make the new venture a success. Obviously.
In my experience, I've seen a minority of clubs specifically target and compete aggressively against other clubs. And this has been to their detriment - dancers don't appear to like to see it and so it can have the opposite (IE harmful) effect.
Trying to actively attract other clubs existing dancers suggests to me that the new club has limited faith/belief in their choice of area as they aren't trying to increase the size of the pie (attracting, keeping and developing brand new dancers to the benefit of ALL clubs in the area) and, instead, are trying to take a slice of the existing pie... This strategy, I feel, is a flaky one that a strong and established club is highly likely to win.
The way i see things is that if organisors work together to get dancers then every club will benifit in not only creating more active dancers but in retaining current ones too.
to book and event and get a date you have to make sure the date is...
1) available to the venue
2) has any guest teachers / DJ's available
3) doesn't clash with something you are already running as a club
4) the date is avaible to you personally.
now factor in competitors dates (which you are not always aware of iff booking something months in advance) and you can see what a nightmare organising events can be.
Also I think aiming to take other venues dancers is a dangerous game. A more solid approch is to bring new beginners in. If you offer a quality product, the more experianced dancers will also come.
Organisors should not be directly looking to take dancers.
Also if there was two venues and one shut, the majority of the dancers from the shut venue would simply stop dancing, only a small handfull of dedicated dancers would carry on.
A couple of quick question: How is a new club to find it's market without 'tapping into' any existing clubs? If the club is 'targeted' at an audience that could attend either event, then how do you let people know that there is an alternative?
Obviously if you are a new club, you want to target folk that would be interested in coming - where is the largest population that fits this criteria? Ethics and business models aside, it makes logical sense to target an existing customer base... Not sure that it makes logical sense to have it on the same night though.
I resent the notion that any venue-operator might consider me to be 'their' property. Firstly I paid a lot to learn and secondly I put in a lot of effort. Therefore, I conclude that my skills are mine and mine alone to use anywhere I choose.
I agree with you.
If you go back to look at the thread where all the discussion about Ceroc taking over the Southport Weekender venue from Jive addiction one thing I took exception for was being considered as one of Cerocs dancers. I got the impression that Ceroc considered that because I had learnt at their venue I was one of the dancers that they had got into dancing. The truth was that I started dancing at one of their comeptitors and then started going to them as well, some four months later. I had paid for my training and if I was anybodies dancer - I was my own - having paid for my training from a whole number of organisations.
My view is that if any organisation failed to handle my desire to progress in my hobby and another organisation fulfill that then I would off in a heart beat. No dance organisation has shown any regards for me over an above the money I bring each week. I sure as heck won't have any feelings towards them beyond the product they provide. If I happen to personally like a particular organiser then that is a bonus while if I don't like them as a person that doesn't put me off their events provided the product quality hurdle has been met.
Well, that was Rockys argument - and although we have joked about it - Rocky has said quite clearly that he does not speak on behalf of Ceroc. I wouldn't assume Ceroc official policy from anything posted on this forum.
To me, - one big difference between a new Ceroc franchaise and a new Indy is that the new Ceroc one will be advertised to all the current Ceroc attendees at nearby clubs (flyers & on stage annoucements). But where do the independents advertise? How DO they attract/advertise to new members exactly? Rely on word of mouth? Surely they can only advertise to people who they know who dance locally on facebook, so that probably cuts out quite a few... - not everyone is on facebook are they... - although I guess that will help get the word of mouth thing going.
As for pulling in punters, - it's a bit of a mystery what makes a club successful. Of course there are lots of factors which make for a good club (like floor, music, venue, parking, air-con), but that doesn't neccessarily mean it WILL be successful, - similar to a row of bars on a night-out somewhere, - some bars will be absolutely empty and others will be ram packed... - a few months later, - the opposite has happened..(?) - for seemingly no other reason than "that's where everyone's else goes"...
I think that's where the 'feel good' factor comes in. The magnitude of the 'feel good' factor depends on lots of variables, e.g. size of venue, charisma of the teacher, how close-knit the dancers are and how many dancers there are. In my experience, even with quite small venues a 'critical-mass' of dancers is required to create a good atmosphere, below that number the night will feel flat and people will drift away.
The actual dance being taught can also have an effect, for example lindy-hoppers tend to be a more closely knit group because fewer people learn lindy-hop and learning requires greater effort and commitment than Modern Jive; this has the effect of lowering the 'critical-mass' required to achieve the 'feel good' factor.
Allegedly James Cronin started his first Ceroc class immediately after Michele Ange Lau's one at the same night and venue.
CerocCentral stopped their Monday night classes in Bedford because it was marginally profitable in itself. The actual situation was that dancers that started there migrated to the Thursday nights at the same venue. It is possible that the Buckingham venue suffers from losing dancers to Milton Keynes. When the Buckingham venue offers something different, like the monthly party night ( happening tonight), the numbers and numbers of experienced dancers are greatly increased.
If nearby clubs offer something different they serve a wider market and can both survive and the customer benefits. That is the model Weatherspoon uses in its pubs, they each have a unique character.
I agree. Protectionism isn't the way forward and in business terms can only ever offer a stop-gap solution.
Ahem ... BUSK, advertise ... get your own following! Aside from all moral arguments (either way) if new clubs don't try to pull in new people then the whole thing will eventually grind to a halt.
{ODA Mode ON} If, however, you are marketing yourself against a Ceroc club with its 'MacDonalds' approach to lessons, then maybe the best way is to market yourself with 'Advanced Nights' ... even though 80% of the punters won't be able to do the moves correctly{ODA Mode OFF}
{ODA Mode ON} If, however, you are marketing yourself against a Ceroc club with its 'MacDonalds' approach to lessons, then maybe the best way is to market yourself with 'Advanced Nights' ... even though 80% of the punters won't be able to do the moves correctlyand this differs from a normal Ceroc night in that ....
lol
The problem with busks etc is you need a good base of dancers to do them with in the first place.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
![$vboptions[bbtitle]](images/master_col.bmp)
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks