OMNI-CHARABANG's
Sun, 24 Oct 1999, 12:10 amJoeMc23 posts in thread
OMNI-CHARABANG's
Sun, 24 Oct 1999, 12:10 amHaving been involved with a number of enterprising ventures and even had a few my self.
I have a wee bit of an insight into various ways the industry works.
Firstly it easy to deal with people and gain a work force if the spice is right, as the price certainly is, need to gain experience and their ego¹s stroked by being able to work on or about the BIG stage - so pick the biggest you can afford, book the venue and they will come out of the wood work.(Ref;- Freinds Of The Theatre's Working in Proffessional venues as an example)Reading the previous postings.
I think you all have valid points and it is rather enjoyable.Just for the hell of 'IT' - I should start a Technical theatre Crewing company that will possibly trade as some gooky name or other (I have not decided on yet}(why not CHARABUNG?????}.This will offer full crewing for all types of productions and each of the technicians will be trained in all aspects of the technical theatre, which they would not normally get - only at a cost to them by going to College or being paid to do so.It is mainly targeted at large spaces such as 6 main venues in Perth.I know I can undercut any and all other contractors, as my crews are pure amateurs and have an that extra incentive to learn, experience and be part of the BIG theatre - as they are able to be in the best shows that hit the boards.One of the main advantages is not being restricted by the usual committee camels trying to be a horse.Sure I know what the punters want and how to extract the green backs enough to support me and of course a few flunkies, and do my bit for Australiain by keeping the dole cue shorter.Also as I won¹t have to pay the venues crew, as they will work for me, I can mount some Major extravaganzas - that would put Disney to shame. The down side is I may have to pay the Muso¹s, as I have yet to formulate a plan to incorporate them.I will be a registered trading name and possible later be trading as a unit trust of a Pty Ltd structure.I doubt I would last very long before the Minister for Fair trading and various others, including the Unions, would be tech' screwing me to a flat and fly¹n me out. Fagganism is not allowed apparently?There are probably lots of reasons why - I won't be able to get away it, as most of them are obvious - I leave it to you.Sure I will fill a void and give opportunities for others to see and be part of the BIG theatre, that the community theatre¹s do not fill at present.But the biggest void to fill - would be my bank account?????What do you recon 'ahJoe 'Omni-directional' McCabe
I have a wee bit of an insight into various ways the industry works.
Firstly it easy to deal with people and gain a work force if the spice is right, as the price certainly is, need to gain experience and their ego¹s stroked by being able to work on or about the BIG stage - so pick the biggest you can afford, book the venue and they will come out of the wood work.(Ref;- Freinds Of The Theatre's Working in Proffessional venues as an example)Reading the previous postings.
I think you all have valid points and it is rather enjoyable.Just for the hell of 'IT' - I should start a Technical theatre Crewing company that will possibly trade as some gooky name or other (I have not decided on yet}(why not CHARABUNG?????}.This will offer full crewing for all types of productions and each of the technicians will be trained in all aspects of the technical theatre, which they would not normally get - only at a cost to them by going to College or being paid to do so.It is mainly targeted at large spaces such as 6 main venues in Perth.I know I can undercut any and all other contractors, as my crews are pure amateurs and have an that extra incentive to learn, experience and be part of the BIG theatre - as they are able to be in the best shows that hit the boards.One of the main advantages is not being restricted by the usual committee camels trying to be a horse.Sure I know what the punters want and how to extract the green backs enough to support me and of course a few flunkies, and do my bit for Australiain by keeping the dole cue shorter.Also as I won¹t have to pay the venues crew, as they will work for me, I can mount some Major extravaganzas - that would put Disney to shame. The down side is I may have to pay the Muso¹s, as I have yet to formulate a plan to incorporate them.I will be a registered trading name and possible later be trading as a unit trust of a Pty Ltd structure.I doubt I would last very long before the Minister for Fair trading and various others, including the Unions, would be tech' screwing me to a flat and fly¹n me out. Fagganism is not allowed apparently?There are probably lots of reasons why - I won't be able to get away it, as most of them are obvious - I leave it to you.Sure I will fill a void and give opportunities for others to see and be part of the BIG theatre, that the community theatre¹s do not fill at present.But the biggest void to fill - would be my bank account?????What do you recon 'ahJoe 'Omni-directional' McCabe
Re: OMNI-CHARABANG's
Sun, 24 Oct 1999, 03:05 pmIt is actually a charabanc, so i am told, but I grew only knowing the 'bang' bit> Ok sounds good to me sure we can get past the unions if the people
> who "work" for us are not in the union. Can I be your partner
> my bank balance could certainly do with a top up. :-)Welcome aboard Carol - We have already got companies operating this way - so why should the Union worry. Take most of the performing artz centres, who use and abuse volunteers to cork up their empire-ships and secure a future for the few, so they can believe they are enhancing the many.> On a more serious note I do think that all companies should be
> incorporated but, they are not and more importantly it would seem
> that they do not have to be so unless this legislation is changed
> there is little anyone can do about it except seek a change in the
> Business Law Act.Having been caught a number of times by Companies with the payed up capital of $2. This a major problem within our system - I hope some one can change it, but I doubt if will ever happen, as this a hedge for their bets. There is more to be said about a trading name, at least you have the option of recovery from their total assets of the individual (under state local court &/or petition for bankruptcy with the Fed's). But that's another story and not what this is about.Omnibus obviously do not want to be incorporated or corporated beyond what they are now, so therefore they feel that there is little or no risk to their personal assets. As they are the 'Captain' of their own ship, they answer to themselves only, win - loose or draw. However, I am sure they would have enough reserves on hand to fund a flop or a disaster - if not they are yo-yo's without any string - if they have these funds, were they gained by not paying what other companies have to? If so are they a quick quid merchant, who use up the weekness of others or have a true quest to enhance the performing arts for the good of all - If it was put to the test, I doubt if the general public and/or my self could buy the later, without something to the contrary that is a true picture of their enterprise.Think that may have far reaching implications and
> would then drag in the dance schools etc that are also "for profit"
> and not incorporated. Could be a bit of a slippery slope argument
> in the end but may be well worth further investigation{The real life Fagan, so I am told, was deported to Australia.}I think there is a wee difference between paying to be taught (I don't think that is the case here} and using people for one's own gain and reward.Sure it gets up my nose when "for profit" schools 'come on' as though they were incorporated and believe they should be supported in the same manner.
I get rather up tight with "artists" who see themselves as the "do gooders" and get on to boards and committees to service their own biz, as though it was "not for profit" - but I am only Tech, what would I know, I suppose that's why I am here!Joe 'stringless' McCabe
> who "work" for us are not in the union. Can I be your partner
> my bank balance could certainly do with a top up. :-)Welcome aboard Carol - We have already got companies operating this way - so why should the Union worry. Take most of the performing artz centres, who use and abuse volunteers to cork up their empire-ships and secure a future for the few, so they can believe they are enhancing the many.> On a more serious note I do think that all companies should be
> incorporated but, they are not and more importantly it would seem
> that they do not have to be so unless this legislation is changed
> there is little anyone can do about it except seek a change in the
> Business Law Act.Having been caught a number of times by Companies with the payed up capital of $2. This a major problem within our system - I hope some one can change it, but I doubt if will ever happen, as this a hedge for their bets. There is more to be said about a trading name, at least you have the option of recovery from their total assets of the individual (under state local court &/or petition for bankruptcy with the Fed's). But that's another story and not what this is about.Omnibus obviously do not want to be incorporated or corporated beyond what they are now, so therefore they feel that there is little or no risk to their personal assets. As they are the 'Captain' of their own ship, they answer to themselves only, win - loose or draw. However, I am sure they would have enough reserves on hand to fund a flop or a disaster - if not they are yo-yo's without any string - if they have these funds, were they gained by not paying what other companies have to? If so are they a quick quid merchant, who use up the weekness of others or have a true quest to enhance the performing arts for the good of all - If it was put to the test, I doubt if the general public and/or my self could buy the later, without something to the contrary that is a true picture of their enterprise.Think that may have far reaching implications and
> would then drag in the dance schools etc that are also "for profit"
> and not incorporated. Could be a bit of a slippery slope argument
> in the end but may be well worth further investigation{The real life Fagan, so I am told, was deported to Australia.}I think there is a wee difference between paying to be taught (I don't think that is the case here} and using people for one's own gain and reward.Sure it gets up my nose when "for profit" schools 'come on' as though they were incorporated and believe they should be supported in the same manner.
I get rather up tight with "artists" who see themselves as the "do gooders" and get on to boards and committees to service their own biz, as though it was "not for profit" - but I am only Tech, what would I know, I suppose that's why I am here!Joe 'stringless' McCabe
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···