How do you split GIG money?

[MDLMUSIC]

When I'm working as the hired gun guitarist, I get paid whatever the bandleader told me he was going to pay me. I have no idea whether or not it is an even split.

 

In my trio where I'm the band leader, I split everything three ways, but take the extra buck or two for myself as compensation for providing the PA and hauling it in and out pretty much on my own. It's not that big of a deal, and since I've got to fit everything into a Kia Spectra station wagon, I've got to put it in a certain way to make sure it all fits.

 

If we play a gig that pays $350 and we make $60 in tips (a total of $410), everybody gets $136. Since 136X3=408, that leaves 2 whole dollars that I get to keep for booking the band and providing the PA.

 

So, basically, I get a free cup of coffee.

[MikeyParent]

 

We split our pay evenly amongst the 4 members, unless there's an agreed upon expense that needs to be taken off the top, then the remainder is split 4 ways.

 

 

Ditto.

[tim_7string]

That's nuts...talk about micromanagement! :poke:

 

Absolutely. Makes my head hurt thinking about all that...

[Zeromus-X]

Dividing by 12 is hard? Christ.

[ToneGrail]

We split everything evenly among six members.

 

I do the majority of the busy work:

-Setting up the PA (jointly owned)

-DeFacto sound man

-Book shows

-Answer Emails and Myspace correspondence

-Maintain the website show listing

-Handle all the finances and bank account, act as paymaster

-Deal with the promoters and venue staff

 

One of the female singers handles most of the promotion (Facebook, Myspace, making flyers, updating the front page of the website) and books some shows.

 

Our sax player coordinates practices and also books some shows.

 

The remaining three members (drummer, keys, bassist) are more or less along for the ride. I'd rather not have them do any of the things I do because they're not very competent and would most likely screw things up. For example, the drummer would most likely skim money off the top if he were tasked with handling the finances. He can't be trusted. The bass player just doesn't have the professional demeanor to be able to negotiate or be firm on pricing. He's the non-confrontational type who wants to please everybody. So he shouldn't book shows or we'd be playing a lot of benefits. The keyboard player won't even do things even when asked most of the time unless I repeatedly nag her about it. So obviously, her lack of motivation would be a show-stopper if she were tasked with following up with emails and contacting promoters. We'd lose a lot of business that way.

 

However, I make them help load in and out. I don't mind as long as they pitch in with the grunt work of loading.

 

The problem is that I always have to crack the whip to get them to help or they'll just sit around or try to sneak out before loading out or show up late to the gig so they can get out of loading.

 

We're definitely going to look into giving a bigger percentage to myself and the other two members who bear the brunt of the busy work.

[wades_keys]

 

Dividing by 12 is hard? Christ.

 

No.

 

That's the easy part.

 

The hard part is keeping track of the "eligibility rules" that you've created.

 

 

1/12 to each band member 1/12 to PA owner 1/12 to Lights owner 1/12 to whoever books the gig 1/12 for loading in, per band member 1/12 for loading out, per band member Whatever is left over (as in, if someone misses load-in or load-out) gets split between those who DID do those things.

 

Sorry dude but that's a right cluster{censored} there: after 4 hours of playing the last thing I want to deal with is complications in getting paid.

[Zeromus-X]

The person who owns the PA and the lights never changes. The only variable is who loads in and out, and who booked the gig. It gives an incentive to those who want to book. For a $600 show, that's a $50 bonus for booking the gig.

 

Similarly, if someone doesn't load in, knock $50 off. If someone doesn't load out, knock $50 off.

 

Are you people all singers or something? This is 3rd grade {censored}. If math isn't your forte', you take the money and split it into 3 equal piles, and then say "Jake wasn't here for load-in" and remove fifty of his dollars from his pile, and put them in the other piles.

 

Again, not saying it would work for everyone, but it encourages people to help load in and out, and rewards those who put money (PA and lights) and time (booking) into the band. If you just want to show up and play, great. You know what you'll be making either way. For a four-piece, divide by 16. For a five-piece, divide by 20.

 

I've been in bands where there was a straight up even split, and that meant there had to be someone who was taking on extra responsibility, and there was always animosity. If I spend $10k on a PA system, and I'm making all the phone calls and driving around to book gigs, why should I get the same cut as someone who drops an amp onto the stage and plays?

[tim_7string]

Dividing by 12 is hard? Christ.

 

No, I can add and subtract just fine, smartalec. It's the breaking down of everything to the point of absurdity.

 

But hey, if it works for you, go for it!

 

I'd rather just have people that understand they all need to pitch in to get paid. I'm pretty sure that if I used your method, it would just piss off current and future potential bandmates and I wouldn't be playing very often at all.

 

I've been in bands where there was a straight up even split, and that meant there had to be someone who was taking on extra responsibility, and there was always animosity. If I spend $10k on a PA system, and I'm making all the phone calls and driving around to book gigs, why should I get the same cut as someone who drops an amp onto the stage and plays?

 

Because without them, you don't have a band?

 

To me, it's simple. Reward your bandmembers and they will continue to show up. You don't think there is already animosity in a situation where people don't get paid as much as the person who has the PA and lights? If you don't, I have news for you. There is, it's just not coming from you.

 

We have a guy in town that has a three-piece. It's his name in the "band" name, he sings almost every song, plays lead guitar, forces his bass players to play through HIS Peavey TKO bass amp ("because it's easier to pack everything"), and handles all the bookings. He gets 50%, the other two get 25% each. I think this is a bit unfair, others probably think it's just fine. While I am in the process of putting together my own trio with my name as the band name, I'm going to split it three ways. It just feels better for me to do so.

[wades_keys]

The best band money can buy.

[Zeromus-X]

 

We have a guy in town that has a three-piece. It's his name in the "band" name, he sings almost every song, plays lead guitar, forces his bass players to play through HIS Peavey TKO bass amp ("because it's easier to pack everything"), and handles all the bookings. He gets 50%, the other two get 25% each. I think this is a bit unfair, others probably think it's just fine. While I am in the process of putting together my own trio with my name as the band name, I'm going to split it three ways. It just feels better for me to do so.

 

 

Would you agree that the guy whose name is in front of the band is doing more work?

 

 

Because without them, you don't have a band?

 

 

So using that logic, if a bar wants you to play for no pay, you should do it, because without them, you don't have a gig?

[wades_keys]

I understand you getting a bigger cut.

 

I just don't understand why your system is so complex.

 

You're lucky you've found dudes that buy into this, I suppose.

 

Far more common would be the "hired gun" set up and get paid an agreed upon rate type of deal.

[tim_7string]

 

Would you agree that the guy whose name is in front of the band is doing more work?

 

 

Yep. People know what they are getting with him. It may not be pleasant (he has a heavy accent when he sings and often screeches when he hits high notes), but he is a fixture on the scene. Because of that, he probably feels he deserves to get half the money.

 

Likewise, my name will be out front and I will definitely be doing more work. I also know that to play with the musicians I want to play with, paying them less will not entice them to join up with me.

 

 

So using that logic, if a bar wants you to play for no pay, you should do it, because without them, you don't have a gig?

 

 

Not really. I guess what I am saying is if you can find people that are happy to play for a smaller percentage in your band and you've been going strong for years, maybe even over a decade, with the same people, that's great. Your system obviously works for you.

 

From my experience with all the bands I've been involved in over the years, I know that it would not work for me. I have found that it is a lot easier keeping bandmates on good terms by being straight with them about the money we are paid (the full amount), any expenses taken off the top being discussed beforehand and splitting the rest.

 

For myself in the band I had in 2005-2006, I resented my bandleaders when they switched from paying an even split to a percentage. I felt it was more their way of letting me and the drummer know that we were their employees/independent contractors and not equals in any way, shape or form. The band basically changed from a "we're all in this together" kind of situation (kind of friends), where the lead singer let us stay at her house free of charge (if the gig was close to where she lived, which was 1.5 hours away for me and the drummer), to a situation where we had to fend for ourselves and a take-it-or-leave-it outlook. I held on for as long as I could until the band just didn't play that much anymore and I moved on.

 

My own personal philosophy is that due to the amount of money involved and the limited amount of playing my band does in a year's time, it's petty for me to try to split what little cash there is up. If I were playing as often as you are, I probably would operate in a different manner. As you say, losing 1/6th of the money choosing not to load in or load out...well, $11,000 is a LOT of cash to consider.

 

If my band happened to generate $66,000 or $100,000 or more a year, I'm sure I would treat it more like a business and money would be allocated appropriately. I just don't think it applies in a weekend band situation.

[Zeromus-X]

We're mostly a weekend band. The singer plays acoustic during the week 2-3 nights, but I don't include that in our figures because I really don't know what he makes. I do know that last year, as a band, we made about $48,876 total. Split that between 3.5 people (we had four people at one point and then reeled back to three) and that's about $14k per person. You won't live comfortably off it, but it's still a good chunk of money!

 

Also, I am not the bandleader in the band I'm talking about, and I'm not the one who came up with this. I'm just the only one on HC.

 

To me, work needs to be rewarded, deserves to be rewarded. If someone wanted to do all the work in the band but still take an equal cut, I'd question their motives and wonder what their reasoning was, and I'd be the first to offer them a bigger cut. They deserve it. You do the work, you deserve the pay. If Bandmate #1 spends ten hours a week driving around, making phone calls, and booking gigs, and Bandmate #2 spends those ten hours out partying with friends, who deserves to make more? The person putting in more effort.

 

Right now, we are actually using a "hired gun" method. We occasionally play with a 4th person when the gig calls for it. All three of us current pitch in an equal amount (arrive at the same time, each has a responsibility, leave at the same time). The fourth guy shows up 30 minutes before the gig and drops a guitar amp down, sticks the mic that we set up in front of it, and plays. He makes a set amount per gig, but never an equal cut (unless for some reason we book a very low-dollar gig!). He's okay with it because it means he doesn't have to spend an hour setting up gear and he gets to leave early.

 

A lot of it has to do with the amount of gear we have, too.

 

 

With all three people working, it takes an hour to load in and about an hour to load out. If one person shows up late or leaves early, you can nearly double that amount of time it takes to get things done. We're a cover band but we're still bringing in 40' of truss, flying the PA system 12' in the air, setting up backdrops, a 300 watt LED lighting rig, etc.

[tim_7string]

With all three people working, it takes an hour to load in and about an hour to load out. If one person shows up late or leaves early, you can nearly double that amount of time it takes to get things done. We're a cover band but we're still bringing in 40' of truss, flying the PA system 12' in the air, setting up backdrops, a 300 watt LED lighting rig, etc.

 

See, it's all about context. You guys are obviously a good-sized production and you actually need each other to coordinate the setup and tear-downs properly. I'm used to bands that are loose and laid back, not the tight ship you guys obviously have. My current PA and lights setup is embarassingly simplistic, but I'm starting over (again) and had to start somewhere. We'll see where things are in a few years.

 

The band I was in before played fairly often (averaged two weekends a month), but for low pay in local bars, the same two clubs every time. In contrast, my current band makes more per gig, but we have only been playing one-nighters here and there (just starting out) and my most recent group hasn't even gotten together yet.

 

Like I said, if I played all the time (that is, practically every weekend), I would certainly treat things a lot differently. When you have a lot on the line, money is a very serious matter indeed.

 

Nice picture, by the way.

[Zeromus-X]

Thanks! I'm definitely into the stage production aspect of things, and we're by far the only ones doing anywhere near this much. I think this is one of my favorite shots:

 

 

It's like the stage just exploded.

[tinker925]

I see both sides of the coin, but I am not sure which is the right way.

 

When you start cutting stuff up here it can get out of hand. A cut for whoever's booking, a cut for whoever owns the PA.... well I think that a lot of folks would then say... a cut for the lead singer who may not be loading in as much, but is carrying the front of the band. It starts to get monotonous.

 

But I also don't think its fair for the dude who owns and lugs the PA around and I do think its a great motivation to get members to book, by giving them a cut.

 

Seriously sounds like whatever works for you, works for you.

[Zeromus-X]

If I didn't get something extra for owning the PA, we wouldn't be using my PA. It's not cheap. If we blow a high frequency driver in a single cabinet, we're talking a potential $900 repair. Meyer shit is expensive! The band knows that this PA is one reason we get booked over other bands -- we've got top-level gear. The lights are another reason we get booked over other bands -- nobody has the stuff we've got. For most bands, taking a lighting cut would be dumb, because a tree of Par cans isn't a significant investment.

 

If I didn't get a cut for the PA, I'd rent it out to the band at each gig. Since I could probably rent this system for $200-$250 per night easily, I think they'd prefer to just split the costs up.

[Bugzie]

Ya know thats the funny part. As a sound guy I usually charge $200-250 a night to load in/out, set everything up, do the sound check, and run the board for the gig. People try to get me to work for less all the time. I politely refuse. Middle of last year I had a hip resurfaced and was out of the game for about 3 months. I was approached to rent some of my equiptment by other SR people and bands. I made more money sitting on my ass than doing shows. Mind you I have almost 30K in equiptment. Not long after getting back into it, I was approached by a group that I had done quite a few shows for. They wanted to pay less and agreed to help with load in and out. Took about 3 gigs before they agreed that saving $50 wasn't enough to squabble over. They liked being able to stow their (minimal) gear and hang out in the bar and drink when the show was done. A small band setup can easily run 15k. I work for what I get and still don't break even. A Meyer rig-- $150 off the top at every show is not out of the question. Its all business.

[axeman663]

I don't gig anymore but did for 18 years . I'm the gutiar player , we were 4 members for the most part 3 piece +vocals .The bass player or myself booked the gigs .the bass player and I set everything up and tore everythng down except the drums . The drummers always took care of there own gear . We split everything evenly . It never was about the money ,it shouldn't be about the money . That being said if I ever start gigging again I'm just gonna hire people to play with cause I can't deal with all the egos and drug problems that drove me to quit gigging .

[gspointer]

I would happily pay someone extra to own and haul/set-up PA and lights. Just curious to those that don't think it should get an extra cut. If the PA owner needs some extra cash, and sells his PA and lights, leaving the band without, would this cause resentment to the band that now needs to hire or buy a PA?

[cooterbrown]

 

The person who owns the PA and the lights never changes. The only variable is who loads in and out, and who booked the gig. It gives an incentive to those who want to book. For a $600 show, that's a $50 bonus for booking the gig. Similarly, if someone doesn't load in, knock $50 off. If someone doesn't load out, knock $50 off. Are you people all singers or something? This is 3rd grade {censored}. If math isn't your forte', you take the money and split it into 3 equal piles, and then say "Jake wasn't here for load-in" and remove fifty of his dollars from his pile, and put them in the other piles. Again, not saying it would work for everyone, but it encourages people to help load in and out, and rewards those who put money (PA and lights) and time (booking) into the band

 

 

Dude, if I was in a band with somebody who wouldn't load in or out, they would be out of that band after two jobs. We had to use a fill-in drummer, once who just packed up his drums and left when the gig was over. He was supposed to have played three gigs with us, but we called him the next day, and told him we wouldn't be needing him, anymore...he was even informed, prior to playing, that load-in/load-out was non-negotiable.

Everybody in my band puts in both time and money, equally...we work as a team, not a bunch of individuals getting nickled and dimed for things they did or didn't do.

[Zeromus-X]

Honestly it's more of a "they were late because they decided to go out to eat" or a "they didn't load out because they were drunk and useless" type situation, rather than an "opt out" situation. That said, I'd have no problem with one person not wanting to load out -- that's extra cash in my pocket for something I've basically got to do anyway.

[SpaceNorman]

 

Dude, if I was in a band with somebody who wouldn't load in or out, they would be out of that band after two jobs. We had to use a fill-in drummer, once who just packed up his drums and left when the gig was over. He was supposed to have played three gigs with us, but we called him the next day, and told him we wouldn't be needing him, anymore...he was even informed, prior to playing, that load-in/load-out was non-negotiable. Everybody in my band puts in both time and money, equally...we work as a team, not a bunch of individuals getting nickled and dimed for things they did or didn't do.

 

 

I with you on that Cooter. Anytime I use a sub who packs his gear and then sits down while the rest of us schlep gear won't be getting a callback from me. I don't expect subs to help with tear down since that requires that you have a clue where things get packed. However once the "ant line" to carry things out to the truck gets started - I expect EVERYBODY who plans on getting paid to help out to some extent. That includes females and subs. Got a bad back ... carry some little stuff - or hold the door - but do something to help the cause. If you simply pull up a seat and watch ... you won't be back.

 

As the guy who handles the $$ - I don't hand out a dime until loadout is done and the truck doors are closed. I won't take a dime extra for providing PA and lights - but I do expect that EVERYBODY helps with the lug.

[Stephenwz968]

Like a lot of bands on here, we split it evenly amongst the 4 of us. I own the PA and do the set up, but the rest of the band helps load in and I firmly believe that no member is more important than another, so we all keep it even. Just my .02....

[dkbmusic]

 

To me, work needs to be rewarded, deserves to be rewarded.

 

 

I agree with Zero, and I think his system is fair, at least if you are playing in a cover band. In a cover band, you are playing as entertainment for the crowd. You are running the band as a professional enterprise (you know this is true if you play songs you don't care for but you know the audience loves). So, if it's a business, it should be run like one. And those that do the most work, would be the hardest to replace, should get paid more. Sounds simple to me!