I have a dilemma. I've been hosting a modest session at my local for the last five years or so. It's a tiny hole in the wall boozer but all the locals agree it's the best wee pub in the city. The session started out as an outlet for some of the people that I'd been teaching over the years who were ready to make the transition into public playing who now play at a very acceptable level.. My philosophy is one of open inclusion, the term "closed session" makes my skin crawl and my eyes turn up. As a result a lot of people have been turning up over the last year or two with instruments. We have visiting musicians from Ireland, the States, different parts on Canada, New Zealand, England, Scotland, they've all been in. So between the musicians that drop in to play from the area plus the local punters who scoop away means that there's always a very lively crowd. So far so good, except that now the bar's over the limit for it's capacity and this poses a very serious issue for my publican as she could stand to incur hefty fines or loss of licence. She can't tell the beer drinkers not to come in, this is her business so I need to sort it out at my end. I would rather a pub with no session than no pub at all so I'm quite prepared to pull the plug. If I had to curtail the number of players how could I do it ? Those who can't play a tune please leave ? That would take care of half of them. No singers allowed ? Travel distance ? I need some advice.
That's a tough one. I run a "closed session" (sorry, you can stop grinding your teeth now) for a similar reason. There is very limited space for players, and we get full tab with food, so I limit the number of people that show up every week, so that we don't overrun our space, overextend our welcome, or drink the place out of business.
In my situation, everybody who plays there understands this dynamic, and will contact me if they're planning on coming down. I pretty much never turn people away, but occasionally I'll tell people that we're already crowded on a given week, and they'll offer to wait til next time, or whatever.
In your situation, you're coming from the other direction, where everybody is used to it being open (whereas mine has been limited since the beginning). But if you discussed the situation with people, you might find that they'd be a bit more mindful, and turn it into a semi-limited situation, without having to make it "closed"...
It's the owner's responsibility to enforce building capacity, not the patrons'. If it's something she cares about, she can hire a bouncer to keep track of it and refuse entry when capacity is reached.
The legal inside limit is 28 patrons by the way. This place is tiny and a bouncer is not an option. There's a great box player from who lives 80 miles away who occasionally drives in with his wife which means that his daughter and boyfriend who live around the corner show up and there's %20 capacity right there.
One way to limit it without "closing" it might be to just make a house rule of X number of players allowed at any one time. So everybody knows if there's already that many people playing, they are not allowed to join. Once everybody understands that, it would probably regulate itself a bit better. There are problems with that idea too, but at least it's not being exclusive.
That sounds like a great little place, Patkiwi. I used to have a session in a place about that size, and it was the best session I ever had, until the bartender quit, and the guy that replaced her decided he wanted open mic night - bah!
Toronto, Canada ~ just to confirm where your session is, somewhere in that vicinity. Ouch! ~ that pains me, as it sounds like a great little session and what would you do if someone showed up unexpectedly from say New Zealand, and you'd aleady reached your allowable limit?
First to ask, those that would know for sure, is it really fixed? Are there legal options? Are the musicians and patrons one in the same or could there be an opt out where the musicians are some added extra? Can the limit be raised, maybe just by the addition of a double door ~ and a kitty to pay for anything of that nature?
We have often exceeded limits on these isles, but there have been some horrible cases of that leading to great loss, several fires, though this was with nightclubs. I have had to deal with authorities over dances that were suddenly past the limit. In one case all we had to do was open the four double doors in the hall. I can't imagine that happening in Vancouver in the middle of winter. It doesn't hurt to ask, to find out exactly what the limit means and if there are any legal loopholes or options. It can only mean more income for the little pub, but hopefully not a larger tax burden...
My prayers are with you... It would be nice if you could resolve it without moving somewhere else, or limiting entrance...
Pat
Problem is the players are also the customers and vice versa. Same old as Dora's, no? So do you limit them as "players" or as "customers". I think the onus is on the owner to limit the number of "people" in the pub....whether they are playes or whatever is somewhat irrelevant isn't it? So I think the only fair way to do it is the first 28 people in the door get to do whatever..play,drink, listen and converse. It has to be first come first serve/play to be fair. So what I would do is email perhaps the "core" players to let them know the publican will be enforcing the 28 limit....so if they want to play...best to get there early. Unfortunately others will just have to disover the limit when they come. Of course, as you say, you could just drop the session altogether, but then everyone's p*ssed off.
You could put together a list of options, other sessions on the same night. I remember there being some choice, if some being across a wide expanse with regards to Toronto and its many satellites... But the last I knew was back in the 1980s...
There could be another option, to start an overspill session in another pub not far from your current one? To sponsor two sessions, and have those willing to see both have a core group to hold them together. It might divide up your session, but it is another possibility...
Limiting it to 28 people overall is what needs to be done, but from the publican's standpoint, it makes a difference if any drinks are provided to the musicians. I sort of inferred that from there being a separation in description between "musicians" and "beer drinkers", but I don't know the situation.
Heck, if the musicians are all paying for their drinks, that could be lucrative night for the pub! But 28 players is not a session I normally want to attend.
What about changing to a different (perhaps quieter) night, or a weekend afternoon?
OK it may still eventually fill up, but you will buy some time.
I'd hate to travel to what sounds like a good session, only to get turned away.
if that's the session i'm thinking of, then it really would be a shame to get turned away since it's a bit out of the way, especially with the public transport being what it is in toronto (though, i guess there's little india nearby for a nice consolation dinner at least.... am i right?). but while it's a shame to think that would happen, at the same time, it's great to know that the music scene is alive and kickin over there anyway, makes me homesick for toronto!
maybe it's just a matter of getting a couple more sessions going on the same night, obviously there's enough of an interest to justify it! geez, things could be worse, eh?
Pat
It would be a shame if the session were to end, since it's our neighbourhood gathering, but at least many of us will have come away with the skills to play elsewhere. It's been a great learning session.
Heather
Hoisted on my own petard
Hoisted on my own petard
I have a dilemma. I've been hosting a modest session at my local for the last five years or so. It's a tiny hole in the wall boozer but all the locals agree it's the best wee pub in the city. The session started out as an outlet for some of the people that I'd been teaching over the years who were ready to make the transition into public playing who now play at a very acceptable level.. My philosophy is one of open inclusion, the term "closed session" makes my skin crawl and my eyes turn up. As a result a lot of people have been turning up over the last year or two with instruments. We have visiting musicians from Ireland, the States, different parts on Canada, New Zealand, England, Scotland, they've all been in. So between the musicians that drop in to play from the area plus the local punters who scoop away means that there's always a very lively crowd. So far so good, except that now the bar's over the limit for it's capacity and this poses a very serious issue for my publican as she could stand to incur hefty fines or loss of licence. She can't tell the beer drinkers not to come in, this is her business so I need to sort it out at my end. I would rather a pub with no session than no pub at all so I'm quite prepared to pull the plug. If I had to curtail the number of players how could I do it ? Those who can't play a tune please leave ? That would take care of half of them. No singers allowed ? Travel distance ? I need some advice.
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by Patkiwi
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
That's a tough one. I run a "closed session" (sorry, you can stop grinding your teeth now) for a similar reason. There is very limited space for players, and we get full tab with food, so I limit the number of people that show up every week, so that we don't overrun our space, overextend our welcome, or drink the place out of business.
In my situation, everybody who plays there understands this dynamic, and will contact me if they're planning on coming down. I pretty much never turn people away, but occasionally I'll tell people that we're already crowded on a given week, and they'll offer to wait til next time, or whatever.
In your situation, you're coming from the other direction, where everybody is used to it being open (whereas mine has been limited since the beginning). But if you discussed the situation with people, you might find that they'd be a bit more mindful, and turn it into a semi-limited situation, without having to make it "closed"...
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by Reverend
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
It's the owner's responsibility to enforce building capacity, not the patrons'. If it's something she cares about, she can hire a bouncer to keep track of it and refuse entry when capacity is reached.
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by mcdevincabe
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
Why not run two, on different nights if you can stand it?
One open for beginners, and closed for the better players.
Most folks are reasonable and will understand, and if they don't would you want them there anyway?
Liam
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by billiamconkey
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
What a nice problem! Sounds like you might need to open some new branches, you know, franchise the operation:
Patkiwi's Irish Sessions, LLC®
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by mickray
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
The legal inside limit is 28 patrons by the way. This place is tiny and a bouncer is not an option. There's a great box player from who lives 80 miles away who occasionally drives in with his wife which means that his daughter and boyfriend who live around the corner show up and there's %20 capacity right there.
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by Patkiwi
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
One way to limit it without "closing" it might be to just make a house rule of X number of players allowed at any one time. So everybody knows if there's already that many people playing, they are not allowed to join. Once everybody understands that, it would probably regulate itself a bit better. There are problems with that idea too, but at least it's not being exclusive.
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by Reverend
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
That sounds like a great little place, Patkiwi. I used to have a session in a place about that size, and it was the best session I ever had, until the bartender quit, and the guy that replaced her decided he wanted open mic night - bah!
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by Reverend
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
Toronto, Canada ~ just to confirm where your session is, somewhere in that vicinity. Ouch! ~ that pains me, as it sounds like a great little session and what would you do if someone showed up unexpectedly from say New Zealand, and you'd aleady reached your allowable limit?
First to ask, those that would know for sure, is it really fixed? Are there legal options? Are the musicians and patrons one in the same or could there be an opt out where the musicians are some added extra? Can the limit be raised, maybe just by the addition of a double door ~ and a kitty to pay for anything of that nature?
We have often exceeded limits on these isles, but there have been some horrible cases of that leading to great loss, several fires, though this was with nightclubs. I have had to deal with authorities over dances that were suddenly past the limit. In one case all we had to do was open the four double doors in the hall. I can't imagine that happening in Vancouver in the middle of winter. It doesn't hurt to ask, to find out exactly what the limit means and if there are any legal loopholes or options. It can only mean more income for the little pub, but hopefully not a larger tax burden...
My prayers are with you... It would be nice if you could resolve it without moving somewhere else, or limiting entrance...
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by ceolachan
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
Pat
Problem is the players are also the customers and vice versa. Same old as Dora's, no? So do you limit them as "players" or as "customers". I think the onus is on the owner to limit the number of "people" in the pub....whether they are playes or whatever is somewhat irrelevant isn't it? So I think the only fair way to do it is the first 28 people in the door get to do whatever..play,drink, listen and converse. It has to be first come first serve/play to be fair. So what I would do is email perhaps the "core" players to let them know the publican will be enforcing the 28 limit....so if they want to play...best to get there early. Unfortunately others will just have to disover the limit when they come. Of course, as you say, you could just drop the session altogether, but then everyone's p*ssed off.
dunno.
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by mtodd
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
You could put together a list of options, other sessions on the same night. I remember there being some choice, if some being across a wide expanse with regards to Toronto and its many satellites... But the last I knew was back in the 1980s...
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by ceolachan
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
There could be another option, to start an overspill session in another pub not far from your current one? To sponsor two sessions, and have those willing to see both have a core group to hold them together. It might divide up your session, but it is another possibility...
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by ceolachan
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
Limiting it to 28 people overall is what needs to be done, but from the publican's standpoint, it makes a difference if any drinks are provided to the musicians. I sort of inferred that from there being a separation in description between "musicians" and "beer drinkers", but I don't know the situation.
Heck, if the musicians are all paying for their drinks, that could be lucrative night for the pub!
But 28 players is not a session I normally want to attend.
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by Reverend
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
pat
start holding it at the AirCanadaCentre...;)
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by mtodd
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
What about changing to a different (perhaps quieter) night, or a weekend afternoon?
OK it may still eventually fill up, but you will buy some time.
I'd hate to travel to what sounds like a good session, only to get turned away.
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by Bren
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
My sentiments too Bren, as I was imagining 'passing through' in a process of thousands of miles...
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by ceolachan
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
if that's the session i'm thinking of, then it really would be a shame to get turned away since it's a bit out of the way, especially with the public transport being what it is in toronto (though, i guess there's little india nearby for a nice consolation dinner at least.... am i right?). but while it's a shame to think that would happen, at the same time, it's great to know that the music scene is alive and kickin over there anyway, makes me homesick for toronto!
maybe it's just a matter of getting a couple more sessions going on the same night, obviously there's enough of an interest to justify it! geez, things could be worse, eh?
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by gretchen
Re: Hoisted on my own petard
Pat
It would be a shame if the session were to end, since it's our neighbourhood gathering, but at least many of us will have come away with the skills to play elsewhere. It's been a great learning session.
Heather
# Posted on June 18th 2008 by boxielady