Need a Disco

[funkymook]

I did pen a detailed response to this but i've decided not to post it, those who know me know what I am worth and when I work for other DJ's £160 is not reflective of what I earn, with the exception of one or 2 those who know me don't use forums, so there won't be a rush of responses in my defence. When I speak to a client I covert the vast majority of enquiries into bookings. However with NAD leads there have been several reviews on responses. I also price in accordance with their recommendations. But as yet it has made no difference. I do note that those I see the the response rate to most enquiries is often 7+ responses. So it's not necessarily going to be that easy.

Though prompted by your post it was meant as a general comment, not directed to you personally (otherwise I would've quoted you), so apologies as I should've made that clear.


So as a general question (as I'm sure many do it, and others have an opinion) - why would a DJ actively seek out and quote for jobs at a substantially lower fee than they know they are worth and can get on sites like GoodParty and NAD?

The very occasional last minute (as within 7 days or so) filling an empty night I can understand but personally I wouldn't chase after them.

[Ryu]

So, finally got upgraded back to a "Silver" DJ Mark award after getting this years PAT testing done...

The only thing holding me back from a Golden award was a "Golden Testimonial", ...which you only get if you take a job from NAD and get Feedback provided. All of the other boxes are ticked, which I find a little frustrating. I don't deem the "Silver" mark as a colour to be particularly proud of....I certainly don't want to promote myself as a "silver" standard DJ....yet the only way I can step up is by gaining work through NAD and hoping the night is a great one (to an extent, out of my control), that the customer can provide good feedback (again, to an extent, out of my control). Aside from anything else, the number/quality of the leads provided to me are, at least in part, determined by my ranking and enquiries in my area, which includes....yup, you guessed...the measures that got me my existing DJ Mark.

Seems like an unneccessary loop to jump through, given I've done everything I can to meet DJM criteria, the only thing missing is something which is largely out of my control.

[Vectis]

the number/quality of the leads provided to me are, at least in part, determined by my ranking and enquiries in my area, which includes....yup, you guessed...the measures that got me my existing DJ Mark.

In terms of "quality" of enquiries, now you have a DJmark (yes, even Silver) you are entitled to receive the "Premium" leads and those from the premium directories. It's only if a client specifies Gold/Platinum/Diamond that you might miss out. Very few do.

Seems like an unneccessary loop to jump through, given I've done everything I can to meet DJM criteria, the only thing missing is something which is largely out of my control.

The DJmark criteria are clearly advertised before you make the decision to join the scheme and any changes are announced months in advance.

The recent change in the way testimonials are handled mainly came about because of the abuse of the old system by folks who set up false email addresses, used their Aunt Mabel etc. to try to squeeze forged feedback through. We usually trapped these by IP or style of writing but we're sure a few made it through

[deltic]

So, finally got upgraded back to a "Silver" DJ Mark award after getting this years PAT testing done...

The only thing holding me back from a Golden award was a "Golden Testimonial", ...which you only get if you take a job from NAD and get Feedback provided. All of the other boxes are ticked, which I find a little frustrating. I don't deem the "Silver" mark as a colour to be particularly proud of....I certainly don't want to promote myself as a "silver" standard DJ....yet the only way I can step up is by gaining work through NAD and hoping the night is a great one (to an extent, out of my control), that the customer can provide good feedback (again, to an extent, out of my control). Aside from anything else, the number/quality of the leads provided to me are, at least in part, determined by my ranking and enquiries in my area, which includes....yup, you guessed...the measures that got me my existing DJ Mark.

Seems like an unneccessary loop to jump through, given I've done everything I can to meet DJM criteria, the only thing missing is something which is largely out of my control.

Which is why I have just terminated my membership with need a disco

I went from a platinum membership to silver overnight due to the new unfair feedback system,in 2 years I had one job from the site,but was happy just to support the site until the new feedback rules.

With regret I had to terminate my membership,I was not prepared to let need a disco give potential clients the wrong impression of the quality of my business.

[Vectis]

I went from a platinum membership to silver overnight

You must have long nights in Cumbria then ... as you had several reminders over 2 months to submit fresh testimonials prior to the change kicking in, both by email and as clear alerts on your dashboard

Two sides to every story... sorry to see you go Andy but respect your decision.


The DJmark criteria are reviewed annually to ensure they remain fit for purpose, and to respond to any loopholes that some less scrupulous members seem to find. This means that over the years they have become more and more difficult to achieve and retain, which is a good thing from the client's perspective because the higher ranked members must really have earned it. There's no point having a multi-tiered accreditation scheme if everyone's sitting on the top tier!

[Ryu]

In terms of "quality" of enquiries, now you have a DJmark (yes, even Silver) you are entitled to receive the "Premium" leads and those from the premium directories. It's only if a client specifies Gold/Platinum/Diamond that you might miss out. Very few do.




The DJmark criteria are clearly advertised before you make the decision to join the scheme and any changes are announced months in advance.

The recent change in the way testimonials are handled mainly came about because of the abuse of the old system by folks who set up false email addresses, used their Aunt Mabel etc. to try to squeeze forged feedback through. We usually trapped these by IP or style of writing but we're sure a few made it through

Thanks Vectis.

Given this issue around Feedback, what is the reasoning behind using Feedback within the DJ Mark criteria? This is still not a watertight method of sifting the real from the fake, so why not side step the whole issue, grade DJs on the tangible business management measures you currently do?

[Vectis]

what is the reasoning behind using Feedback within the DJ Mark criteria?

a) it's demanded by clients and users of the service
b) any idiot can buy PLI, get their gear PAT'ed and call themselves a DJ
c) when we costed out other options (e.g.. team of "inspectors" or "mentors" for want of a better description) it was clear no-one would pay this

so feedback is the best compromise. It's also the process that Joe Public is familiar with and has a certain amount of trust in.

This is still not a watertight method of sifting the real from the fake

It would take a very determined and extremely cleverly executed effort to subvert the process (much of the behind the scenes checking methodology is not advertised for obvious reasons).

If a member were to somehow get a fake testimonial credited, they would also need to keep on doing it on a regular basis to stay ahead of the 5:1 and 10:1 positive/negative requirements for the higher awards.

[ppentertainments]

I think if the produb disclaimer was scrutinized more, about 99% of DJ Mark holders would find they no longer qualified.

[Vectis]

I think if the produb disclaimer was scrutinized more, about 99% of DJ Mark holders would find they no longer qualified.

As has been mentioned previously, two DJmark disclaimers have now been supplied to the relevant authorities in response to official requests, and the wording was amended earlier this year to better reflect their needs.

If you have evidence that a member has submitted a disclaimer fraudulently, there is a 'Report Problem DJ' facility on the DJmark.org website. Or, of course, the 'official' channels via PRS for Music or Trading Standards.

Incidentally, only 38% of DJmark holders as of this morning are running on a disclaimer rather than an actual licence.

[Ryu]

a) it's demanded by clients and users of the service
b) any idiot can buy PLI, get their gear PAT'ed and call themselves a DJ
c) when we costed out other options (e.g.. team of "inspectors" or "mentors" for want of a better description) it was clear no-one would pay this

so feedback is the best compromise. It's also the process that Joe Public is familiar with and has a certain amount of trust in.




It would take a very determined and extremely cleverly executed effort to subvert the process (much of the behind the scenes checking methodology is not advertised for obvious reasons).

If a member were to somehow get a fake testimonial credited, they would also need to keep on doing it on a regular basis to stay ahead of the 5:1 and 10:1 positive/negative requirements for the higher awards.

Ok, so, fair enough... one more question...

1) Why a golden testimonial ahead of Testimonials provided by Non-NAD work? If you have the behind the scenes vetting stuff, would that not provide as much assurance?

I've yet to secure a NAD booking...and have none currently "lined" up, so am likely to remain Silver in the near future. Even then, I can't be guaranteed to receive great feedback (not for want of trying). All the while, I am regularly working on Non-Nad bookings, receiving feedback regularly (always offered, never asked for). How about a little Photo evidence perhaps me and some B and G's with Thumbs Up, set up in the background maybe?