Do you support the idea of regulation? [Archive]

Corabar Entertainment

22-10-2010, 11:16 AM

So, the basic question is would you support regulation of the industry in principle (ie some sort of certification / licence)?

We all know that there is a plethora of details that no-one can agree one (Who? What? Where? How? etc) and also that there could be a hundred poll options under the general heading of 'depends' or 'maybe', but just for discussion purposes to keep it simple you'll need to come down on either one side of the fence or the other! - It's either 'Yes - in principle' (which would obviously depend on the details of such certification / licence) or 'No' (meaning that you do not agree with certification / licensing at all)

Do you think that it would benefit the industry?

Do you think it would raise the bar?

Do you think it would eliminate rogue traders / sixty-quid-sids?

Would you be prepared to pay what would likely be a significant licence / administration fee?

Creature

22-10-2010, 11:19 AM

Do you think that it would benefit the industry? probally

Do you think it would raise the bar? no because no one will agree to one standard

Do you think it would eliminate rogue traders / sixty-quid-sids? nope - they will operate reguardless - after all how likely are they to be caught or asked questions

Would you be prepared to pay what would likely be a significant licence / administration fee? depends but probally not as it will push prices up further making it even easier for the 60- quid sids

DeckstarDeluxe

22-10-2010, 11:39 AM

I Put no. I cant see a way for it to be effective and flushing out the cowboys. If someone books someone that cheap anyway then they arent my customer

I dont think it will raise the bar either and as perviously said it wouldnt stop people employing sids.

All I can see it doing is costing legit guys more money and giving them more reason to think of going off the rader and becoming a cash in the hand 60 quid sid.

I think educating clients is the answer rather than "taking out the trash"

Corabar Entertainment

22-10-2010, 11:42 AM

But playing devil's advocate here, if venues (as part of their own licence / registration / regulation) were only allowed to employ 'registered' DJs........?

Excalibur

22-10-2010, 11:42 AM

In principle, I support it absolutely. However, I'd worry that it would be one more case of us playing by the rules, and paying for the priveledge, thus giving Sid an even bigger advantage. I have no idea how you could possibly police it, for instance "Oh I'm not being paid for tonight, I'm just doing it for fun". ( Yeah. And thirty "free" pints of Lager during the week, eh? )

I have a terrible foreboding that while it's a laudable ambition, it may actually have an adverse effect, Yours Truly, Cassandra. :(

Solitaire Events Ltd

22-10-2010, 11:43 AM

But playing devil's advocate here, if venues (as part of their own licence / registration / regulation) were only allowed to employ 'registered' DJs........?

Why would they though?

DeckstarDeluxe

22-10-2010, 11:46 AM

But playing devil's advocate here, if venues (as part of their own licence / registration / regulation) were only allowed to employ 'registered' DJs........?

They will find some way around it. For the price of a license to be cost effective and affordable then they arent exactly going be able to employ enough staff to enforce it? How many functions take place up and down the country each friday and saturday? If it is booked by the client then the venue isnt going to tell a customer who may of spent thousands of pounds hiring the venue they can't have their dj?

I wish I could see a way of it working but living in the real world its never going to happen.

Look at produb for example

Corabar Entertainment

22-10-2010, 11:52 AM

Why would they though?Well that would depend on who was implementing the licence, wouldn't it? Local Authority? PRS/MCPS/PPL?

The venues require various licences, and if one of those 'authorities' decided to 'regulate' DJs, then surely it would be a logical step for them to impose such a restriction within the licence they issue to the venue?

As I said, I am playing devil's advocate here as I can't see it ever happening, but just thought it might be an interesting debate :)

As to enforcement, if it were policed by the same people who police the venues... no additional costs for enforcement! :D

Excalibur

22-10-2010, 11:53 AM

Well that would depend on who was implementing the licence, wouldn't it? Local Authority? PRS/MCPS/PPL?

You've missed out the only keen, thorough, cost efffective, dedicated, knowledgeable, and widespread team to do it.

US! . What with my Produb badge, and my one for seeking out unliucensed DJ's, I'm going to need a bigger chest to pin my badges on. :D :D

Megamix

22-10-2010, 11:54 AM

I think better education, visibility, clarity would need to come before regulation - this country has too much of that already IMHO.

MikeW

22-10-2010, 11:55 AM

Very interesting debate. I would like to think it would work, but not sure.

If it were to run along the same lines as being corgi registered (same as for gas instalation. I know it has been updated, but can't remember what to)

Solitaire Events Ltd

22-10-2010, 11:56 AM

If it were to run along the same lines as being corgi registered

I think what people seem to forget is that ultimately we are entertainers. What we do is not a life or death situation.

DeckstarDeluxe

22-10-2010, 11:57 AM

Whatever happens you cant change the fact some people only have a small budget for "entertainment" and that they dont regard the dj important enough to splash out on.

The only thing I think needs sorting out is the way hotels charge clients for using their own dj.

JTRS

22-10-2010, 12:54 PM

Do you think that it would benefit the industry?

Do you think it would raise the bar?

Do you think it would eliminate rogue traders / sixty-quid-sids?

Would you be prepared to pay what would likely be a significant licence / administration fee?

No, I don't think it would benefit the industry as a whole. I'm thinking along the lines of Federation of Master Builders, or Corgi registered as prime examples. They have set standards, they've been established for a long time and yet we still hear horror stories of tradesmen (pronounced cowboys) stealing their 'mark' and doing a bad job.

The only people who would rise to the challenge of raising the bar ar the pro's who already strive to continually improve, those who see something that's a good idea and incorporate it in. It's either in you or it's not, and if it is then you are probably already at the required level anyway

No I don't think you can eliminate rogue traders from any industry, look at the industries that are already regulated and tell me they are all 100% and free from the bad apples.

No I wouldn't pay a fee, I'm already doing the best that I can, always looking to improve and will adopt anything that improves my service. Being licensed isn't going to make any difference whatsoever to me, and whilst it might impress some customers I think most would book on a recommendation a DJ who wasn't licensed.

JTRS

Jonathan Ford

22-10-2010, 01:15 PM

I voted no, on the basis that I believe it to be unnecessary, unenforceable and an unfair burden on part time DJ's.

Solitaire Events Ltd

22-10-2010, 01:24 PM

and an unfair burden on part time DJ's.

Why only part time DJs?

DJWilson

22-10-2010, 01:27 PM

If it were to run along the same lines as being corgi registered (same as for gas instalation. I know it has been updated, but can't remember what to)

Gas safe ;)

I don't think new guidelines and/or a licence would make a difference, people book £60 sid while there's PLI/PAT/ProDub in place already so one more won't make much difference, if any IMO.

Corabar Entertainment

22-10-2010, 01:30 PM

people book £60 sid while there's PLI/PAT/ProDub in place already ...two of which aren't legally required, and the third is only required by some DJs and is unenforced / unenforceable

STEVE HANLEY

22-10-2010, 02:15 PM

I've voted yes even though I think it's pretty much unenforceable. I've got PAT/PLI and am now going to contact produb. To tell them I've now gone fully digital. An expense I could well do without, cos Produb IMHO is nothing more than jobs for the boys.

Go digital for the first time at a wedding tonight. Wish me luck:( :zip: :eek::D

deltic

22-10-2010, 02:49 PM

good luck steve

DeckstarDeluxe

22-10-2010, 02:55 PM

I've voted yes even though I think it's pretty much unenforceable. I've got PAT/PLI and am now going to contact produb. To tell them I've now gone fully digital. An expense I could well do without, cos Produb IMHO is nothing more than jobs for the boys.

Go digital for the first time at a wedding tonight. Wish me luck:( :zip: :eek::D

Best thing you'll ever do!

Takes abit of getting use to but its worth it. Less time searching for cds, loading them up etc... and more time searching for the best tune to play next. In fact what I do early doors is add songs that I think I'll play judging by the crowd/event onto a playlist so you can refer to later in the evening :)

STEVE HANLEY

22-10-2010, 03:14 PM

Best thing you'll ever do!

Takes abit of getting use to but its worth it. Less time searching for cds, loading them up etc... and more time searching for the best tune to play next. In fact what I do early doors is add songs that I think I'll play judging by the crowd/event onto a playlist so you can refer to later in the evening :)

Cheers Neil. I certainly can see the many advantages it has over cd's. I'll be taking VDJ and the cd decks as back up though. Lol

simon1969

22-10-2010, 04:14 PM

But playing devil's advocate here, if venues (as part of their own licence / registration / regulation) were only allowed to employ 'registered' DJs........?

Yes that may work but some venues could waiver the rules unless it became law for all dj's to be registered which I can't see happening anytime soon.... :)

Corabar Entertainment

22-10-2010, 04:27 PM

Well, no, I don't think anyone can see it happening any time soon - but we're only discussing 'hypotheticals' here :D, and yes, what we are talking about is the requirement for all DJs to be registered in order to work. :)

simon1969

22-10-2010, 04:49 PM

CRAZY K

22-10-2010, 05:17 PM

I think what people seem to forget is that ultimately we are entertainers. What we do is not a life or death situation.

Maybe it is:confused:

On Wednesday I was doing a Wedding in Brum and there were some very silly people present.

To my disbelief before I could move to avert the problem one of these people holding a baby took it up to my lighting rig and touched its tiny hand ON the front of the lighting effects on the T BAR--Impossibled, Laser, etc which were behind my speaker line but the child was lifted up:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

This idiot father needed telling what a nutter he was but I could only say thats not a good idea and highly dangerous:mad:

Im confident my kit is safe, PAT tested etc but if its Sixty Quid Sid who knows--it could just be death:eek: :eek: :eek:

I just wish the authorities at venues would at least insist on every performer submitting PAT information before entering the building and inspect it.

So I agree much more stringent regulations need to apply, getting it in place will be the problem.

Excalibur

22-10-2010, 06:04 PM

I've voted yes even though I think it's pretty much unenforceable. I've got PAT/PLI and am now going to contact produb. To tell them I've now gone fully digital. An expense I could well do without, cos Produb IMHO is nothing more than jobs for the boys.
Ooh no mate, the MP3's will sound so much better, and you'll notice a shining ring of light hovering over your head. ;) :D :D

Go digital for the first time at a wedding tonight. Wish me luck:( :zip: :eek::D
All the best mate, good luck. Don't get too bored with all the spare time you'll have not searching for CD's.

Well, no, I don't think anyone can see it happening any time soon - but we're only discussing 'hypotheticals' here :D, and yes, what we are talking about is the requirement for all DJs to be registered in order to work. :)
Ooh, now we're getting into restrictive practices!!:eek: :eek: :eek: I'm just off to peruse the human rights act, cos I'm sure that must breach it . ;) ;) :D :D :D :D

Corabar Entertainment

22-10-2010, 06:16 PM

Ooh, now we're getting into restrictive practices!!:eek: :eek: :eek: I'm just off to peruse the human rights act, cos I'm sure that must breach it . ;) ;) :D :D :D :DOK - 'registered' may be the wrong word, but produce their licence or certificate or whatever the all-in-one everything regulated centrally thing might be called...... my point is, you'd have to 'register' in order to get the licence / certificate!

Megamix

22-10-2010, 06:22 PM

Don't get too bored with all the spare time you'll have not searching for CDs

I'm afraid I disagree - the extra time it gives me saves me from panic :D

Corabar Entertainment

22-10-2010, 06:25 PM

:ontopic:

Could we please take the chatter re Steve going digital to another thread & keep this one vaguely on topic? :(

Excalibur

22-10-2010, 06:35 PM

OK - 'registered' may be the wrong word, but produce their licence or certificate or whatever the all-in-one everything regulated centrally thing might be called...... my point is, you'd have to 'register' in order to get the licence / certificate!
As I know you realised, my post was not the most deadly serious one I've ever made. ;) :D :D

Angela, as I said previously, I do support the theory of regulation, but the more we delve into the possibilities and consequences, the more I worry/fear/believe/predict that unless a nationwide scheme could be put into place with cast iron adherence to it , then it would hurt the saints much more than the sinners. ;)

A nationwide registration scheme with a Quango to administer it? Oh goody. :( :(

A registration scheme which bumps my prices up by even a fiver? How many ways will Sid think of to circumvent that? :( :(

All in all, I think my badge idea's the best so far. ;) :D :D :D Can I have " Marshall" on mine?

Jonathan Ford

22-10-2010, 08:48 PM

Why only part time DJs?

I figure that if there's going to be a (no doubt exorbitant) registration fee, then it will be highly detrimental and cost prohibitive to the guy that does 1-2 gigs a month, when compared to the guy that does much, much more. If a fee were to be introduced, it would need to be pro-rata to be fair...and probably unenforceable on that basis.

DJMaxG

22-10-2010, 11:31 PM

Corabar Steve

23-10-2010, 02:02 AM

Excalibur

23-10-2010, 06:53 AM

The question is :

What are you regulating?

Are you just regulating the legality of the DJ, or mic skills and the ability to read the crowd?

Would a DJ who is inconfident on the mic supposedly have their application refused?

The question is:

A) Why are you even asking?

It's not as if you're a working / gigging DJ

B) Why do you continue to sprout such utter nonsense?

Oh no Steve, Max is bang on the money, I feel. ;) Just imagine, a punter comes up and asks the DJ " Can you wish my Auntie Mabel a Happy Birthday, she's 107".

DJ replies " Sorry mate, I'm not licensed for that.:( I'm only allowed to do last orders, and announce the buffet". :D :D :D :D :D

PS, Steve. Why the delicious small greeen vegetable reference? :confused: :p :D :D :D

deltic

23-10-2010, 08:17 AM

Oh no Steve, Max is bang on the money, I feel. ;) Just imagine, a punter comes up and asks the DJ " Can you wish my Auntie Mabel a Happy Birthday, she's 107".

DJ replies " Sorry mate, I'm not licensed for that.:( I'm only allowed to do last orders, and announce the buffet". :D :D :D :D :D

PS, Steve. Why the delicious small greeen vegetable reference? :confused: :p :D :D :D

nearly fell off the chair laughing

James

23-10-2010, 09:46 AM

In theory it works, in practice it probably wont

Solitaire Events Ltd

23-10-2010, 10:57 AM

Excalibur

23-10-2010, 11:43 AM

So if someone makes their living from this, then the fee should be higher? I think not....

It should be the same for everyone.

Perhaps with a North/South weighting? :whistle: :sofa:

Jonathan Ford

23-10-2010, 12:03 PM

So if someone makes their living from this, then the fee should be higher? I think not....

It should be the same for everyone.

I don't agree that it should be the same for everyone, but should be pro-rata. As an example, I've often gone months and months without working, through choice (when my day job has been too demanding, or I've been working away from home for prolonged periods). If not being registered would preclude any option for me to work, then I would need to maintain my registration, which would ultimately be cost prohibitive. I'd liken it to car insurance, for example, in that with all other things being equal, a driver who covers 50,000 miles each year will have a higher premium that one driving 8,000.

I haven't researched it, so will freely stand corrected, but I would imagine other registration schemes like GasSafe/Corgi don't have people enrolled whose intention is to fit one boiler every couple of months.

Solitaire Events Ltd

23-10-2010, 12:07 PM

I would imagine other registration schemes like GasSafe/Corgi don't have people enrolled whose intention is to fit one boiler every couple of months.

People get the GasSafe certification so they can do their job. Why would it make any difference whether they were full time or part time? They or their companies pay the same amount to get it.

Jonathan Ford

23-10-2010, 12:21 PM

People get the GasSafe certification so they can do their job. Why would it make any difference whether they were full time or part time? They or their companies pay the same amount to get it.

That's kind of the point I was making (very badly); that people who may be very proficient, but do not want to work full time, are not working because of the costs of registration.

Surely, the very idea of regulating the industry is to exclude Sid, but it would be a massive shame if we also excluded those part timers who conduct themselves professionally and provide an outstanding service by making the whole thing financially unviable.

Incidentally, I don't know if it can be done, but I'd like to change my vote. I do indeed support the principle of regulation, but think it is utterly unworkable.

Excalibur

23-10-2010, 12:35 PM

Incidentally, I don't know if it can be done, but I'd like to change my vote. I do indeed support the principle of regulation, but think it is utterly unworkable.
I don't think that's necessary.Seems to me that we all think it's an excellent idea in theory, but beset with pitfalls in practice. :( :( :(

DeckstarDeluxe

23-10-2010, 12:43 PM

I think what Darren said earlier pretty much sumed it up with the fact what we do isnt life or death. Mentioning the CORGI for example is and was introduced because of cowboy repairs were injuring and killing people.

If you think of industries that are like us in the fact we are just an entertainment service how many are regulated? First one that crops into my head is doormen but other than that I'm struggling.

Excalibur

23-10-2010, 12:50 PM

Jonathan Ford

23-10-2010, 01:17 PM

Actors. Equity. :p :D :D

I though Equity was just a trade union, not a regulatory body. There are some scarily bad actors around!

Excalibur

23-10-2010, 01:21 PM

I though Equity was just a trade union, not a regulatory body. There are some scarily bad actors around!

AFAIK, you're not in Equity= you don't work.

Jonathan Ford

23-10-2010, 01:23 PM

AFAIK, you're not in Equity= you don't work.

Just closed shop type trade unionism, as far as I know, not formal regulation. Otherwise, explain Ian Beale!

andyw

23-10-2010, 01:58 PM

I figure that if there's going to be a (no doubt exorbitant) registration fee, then it will be highly detrimental and cost prohibitive to the guy that does 1-2 gigs a month, when compared to the guy that does much, much more. If a fee were to be introduced, it would need to be pro-rata to be fair...and probably unenforceable on that basis.

yes and they should pay a lot more for the music because they use it more often:)
i think the price should be set low to encourage everyone to register (everyone on an even playing field), the idea is great in principle but would not work in reality imo, i assume it would be aimed at getting rid of the sixty quid sids who work outside the law with illegal downloads and not paying tax etc, if the powers that be(who have the power) cannot catch them and stop them now, then do you really think us paying a little bit morefor a license would stop them. i am sorry to say i would see it as an easy way for some body to make money out of us without really regulating it.
so i voted no