Comments on: My modest proposal for City Stages http://bhamterminal.com/mybirmingham/2009/06/19/my-modest-proposal-for-city-stages/ The Terminal's editorial page Sat, 17 Jul 2010 00:56:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Dystopos http://bhamterminal.com/mybirmingham/2009/06/19/my-modest-proposal-for-city-stages/comment-page-1/#comment-399 Dystopos Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:15:42 +0000 http://bhamterminal.com/mybirmingham/?p=139#comment-399 I've published ideas for improving city stages many times before. Here's a current crop: 1. The main thing is to make the schedule a MUST SEE rather than a "ho hum". In my opinion, there are several tacks you could take to accomplish this (although you probably have to pick just one). A) Get blockbuster headliners that no one can pass up. This ain't easy but the Crawfish Boil seems to come close. B) Book unique mash-ups and market them. Fans who travel might just as well leave an outdoor festival in Alabama off their schedule, but if their favorite artist appears on-stage here with another big name as a one-off event, then they might jump at the chance to see a unique show -- plus you get lasting buzz from YouTube and fan sites C) Do at least one genre REALLY well. Maybe "shape note singing" isn't the most marketable example, but there's no reason City Stages couldn't put together a kick-ass line up of 3 days of gospel superstars, or blues legends, or hot bluegrass bands or SOMETHING that would get the big fans of those genres booking flights. D) And why not use the booking talent we have? In the opinion of lots of folks, any given weekend at Bottletree has more going for it than any of the last few City Stages. Even if you just give them one stage to book, you could get a lot of buzz (and maybe curtail their public criticisms). 2. The next biggest thing is to lower ticket prices. Somehow that first 1989 festival made a profit with 38,000 customers who paid $3 a day or less to get in. My guess is that we're wasting money closing off too many streets and renting too many stages for too many days. Maybe aiming for 200,000 visitors is the wrong way to have a fun festival. Maybe 60,000 who are really having fun and not going broke doing it is better for everybody. Maybe the Railroad Park will be a better setting, but if it stays downtown, why not just at Linn Park. (and remember, we already own a functioning stage at Boutwell... why not use it and let people cool off?) 3. Another possibility would be breaking City Stages up into a series of one-night music festivals. Put 5 or 6 really good acts on a bill and hold it at the Railroad Park amphitheater or Linn Park and charge $12. If you do 6 of those, anyone who goes to all six has paid $72 for admission (or $50 for a season pass) and hasn't felt cheated. Plus you've only had to book 36 acts instead of 200 and you've spread out the risk of bad weather. Keep the "brand identity" high with marketing and ancillary events (merchandise, dance stages, kids activities, etc) and take the artists with high cultural value to do teaser shows at the schools (throw in some low cost tickets for students and you can probably go after public support again, too) I’ve published ideas for improving city stages many times before. Here’s a current crop:

1. The main thing is to make the schedule a MUST SEE rather than a “ho hum”. In my opinion, there are several tacks you could take to accomplish this (although you probably have to pick just one). A) Get blockbuster headliners that no one can pass up. This ain’t easy but the Crawfish Boil seems to come close. B) Book unique mash-ups and market them. Fans who travel might just as well leave an outdoor festival in Alabama off their schedule, but if their favorite artist appears on-stage here with another big name as a one-off event, then they might jump at the chance to see a unique show — plus you get lasting buzz from YouTube and fan sites C) Do at least one genre REALLY well. Maybe “shape note singing” isn’t the most marketable example, but there’s no reason City Stages couldn’t put together a kick-ass line up of 3 days of gospel superstars, or blues legends, or hot bluegrass bands or SOMETHING that would get the big fans of those genres booking flights. D) And why not use the booking talent we have? In the opinion of lots of folks, any given weekend at Bottletree has more going for it than any of the last few City Stages. Even if you just give them one stage to book, you could get a lot of buzz (and maybe curtail their public criticisms).

2. The next biggest thing is to lower ticket prices. Somehow that first 1989 festival made a profit with 38,000 customers who paid $3 a day or less to get in. My guess is that we’re wasting money closing off too many streets and renting too many stages for too many days. Maybe aiming for 200,000 visitors is the wrong way to have a fun festival. Maybe 60,000 who are really having fun and not going broke doing it is better for everybody. Maybe the Railroad Park will be a better setting, but if it stays downtown, why not just at Linn Park. (and remember, we already own a functioning stage at Boutwell… why not use it and let people cool off?)

3. Another possibility would be breaking City Stages up into a series of one-night music festivals. Put 5 or 6 really good acts on a bill and hold it at the Railroad Park amphitheater or Linn Park and charge $12. If you do 6 of those, anyone who goes to all six has paid $72 for admission (or $50 for a season pass) and hasn’t felt cheated. Plus you’ve only had to book 36 acts instead of 200 and you’ve spread out the risk of bad weather. Keep the “brand identity” high with marketing and ancillary events (merchandise, dance stages, kids activities, etc) and take the artists with high cultural value to do teaser shows at the schools (throw in some low cost tickets for students and you can probably go after public support again, too)

]]>