Britain clamps down on fringe and profit share theatre.

All good points, Helen. There is always going to be a place for fringe companies like Pocket. As you say, it is largely the theatre practitioners themselves coming together to produce theatre, and should be viewed very differently to a producer who is exploiting his performers. With no pretense of being properly paid work, Pocket's status is clearly amateur (I use the word literally and in no way as a slur on the quality). And yet because you are truly amateur (ie: 'for the love of') you endeavor to give back as much as you can to the artists who participate. Not only that, it is a learning ground where risks can be taken in a supportive environment, and an avenue for up and coming writers, actors, and directors to hone their craft. All a valuable contribution to the industry. I participated in a Pocket show late last year, fully aware that was not likely to really earn me anything at all. I did it because of the challenge of learning a solo show in a very short amount of time, I was impressed with the quality of the original script, and I trusted the writer/director. It was a valuable learning experience for me as a performer, and as it turned out I came away with a few hundred dollars as some compensation. It is clear from your ticket prices, production costs, and advertising budget that this is a minimal-budget company. You cater to a patronage who enjoy those productions at those prices, and there is an avenue for learning that is not provided at any of the big training institutions: how to create a show out of virtually nothing! I have not ever had a problem with this sort of endeavor. I have no doubt the majority of you reading this website have worked in similar companies. Regardless of whether you earn and redistribute any money, (and regardless of how you choose to see yourself), you are basically amateur until you are capable of providing work-standard wages (ie professional). A basic good guideline would be: do you require your performers to rehearse/be available full-time during the day? If so, you need to be providing a minimum standard of guaranteed wages and conditions. If not, you are amateur, and your performers are free to maintain other jobs, which you work around. Like I pointed out, there is NO problem from an Equity standpoint with these types of companies. I think most people got scared of the report at the top of this thread through entirely misunderstanding it. (My guess is not many actually read it objectively (if at all), but simply responded to Grant's first post on the subject. Cheers, Craig ~<8>-/====\---------