The chairman suggested we contact the General Manager of the Melbourne Fringe Festival. I can see the point in that, though he is part of that office, he did strike me as a kind and reasonable chap. The chairman took the liberty of emailing our above story to the General Manager. What follows below is my response to the email that the General Manager sent me - his email is quoted. Again, this is after he received pretty much exactly what you just read.

FINAL EMAIL WITH THE MELBOURNE FRINGE FESTIVAL

> Attached is a screen save of the relevant page in our registration website
> where you agreed to associated costs and terms for a ticketed event.

Yes, I am very versed in that paragraph - it however contains absolutely no reference to alterations of ticket prices or show cancellations whilst a show is running.

Margaret very specifically stated to me, and confirmed via email, that I signed a contract clearly stating the artists cannot alter the ticket price. Even with an elementary reading of the agreement paragraph you emailed it is obvious that there is no provision for such eventualities.

Again - my point being, a NON-EXISTENT clause in a contract was used to HALT our production.I stated to Margaret 'we cannot continue the production if we charge at the door as we cannot do that at the new venue, we have to either accept donations or not do the show' - to which she replied again - 'the contract states you cannot change the ticket price you have to charge the same price at the door'.

Therefore, we cannot, according to Margaret, continue our show at the new venue.

> Fringe staff. I understand from both Hubert and Margaret that we have made
> every effort to accommodate your requests however some things are not
> possible.

Our one and only request was the above ticket change, since Margaret's statements did not square up with our reading of the agreement I merely, politely and professionally asked for clarification. To this request she quite clearly evaded a direct answer - I have the emails to demonstrate this. When we were forbidden to change venues we merely asked for an explanation from Hubert to why this was so - again this simple question was met with evasion of Howardian proportions - to this conversation we have notes and third party observation.

It is quite clear no effort was made to accommodate, what appeared to be quite simple requests, and every effort was made to stymie resolution. In fact we offered several times in these interactions opportunities for Fringe staff to reach a quick efficient resolution that was beneficial for all parties and maintain dignity for all. We certainly did not want to pursue any further - and even this email we view as something extremely unnecessary if only we encountered a modicum of professionalism from the fringe staff.

> When registering an event, artists have three options - ticketed event, free
> event, one off ticketed event. Once you selected a ticketed event we
> published venue details and ticket costs in our publications. Patrons then
> purchased tickets to your event prior to the request to change the
> registration type to a free event.

Yes, we know that. I emailed Margaret discussing the provisions for the (I think) four people who bought tickets - her response is outlined above. We did have plans for these four if a refund wasn't possible - shower the patrons with love & gifts - buy them drinks - get them the best seats in the house - and if need be refund them personally. We were prepared to do all that if it meant keeping the show going. Again - request to change registration type to free - even when no tickets were sold to shows were met with a resounding 'no'.

> I believe that there has been some confusion regarding the decision to move
> venue. Concerns raised with you and Northcote Town Hall by Melbourne Fringe
> staff were to ensure that correct process for communicating the change were
> followed. Changes to venues need to be flagged with Melbourne Fringe staff
> as well as the venue to ensure that our information is correct and patrons
> can be advised.

I emailed Margaret on the same day we had confirmation from the venues that we could move. I can't see how we could have been more correct about our processes without some sort of time travel device. Indeed what were the correct processes? There is nothing from the fringe stating what a production needs to do in such circumstances.

We DID flag it with the Fringe as soon as it was possible, for precisely the reasons you state.

> A few weeks ago I was disappointed to read the statement regarding Melbourne
> Fringe ticketing charges posted on your myspace. The information was
> incorrect and I think it reflected badly on both Melbourne Fringe and your
> event.

Indeed - this is the crux of the matter isn't it? This was used by Hubert to justify the phone call to the venue telling them we could not play there. It was then used by Hubert - 'take down the information on the website and I will phone Dave and tell him you can do your show', this is direct quote, notes were taken.

Regardless of what was on the website - it is an INDEPENDENT production and Fringe has no place in censoring artists in ANY matter. We could have said the staff are a mob of ugly poopy-pants and we think the festival is a cover for luring a force of invading aliens and it STILL is utterly irrelevent to your staff. This is NOT the Melbourne Festival - we are not your employees and we have not been curated by the festival. Censorship in any form by your staff to the artists is an extremely serious matter. Indeed I thought it was part of your charter to have 'irreverent and edgy' elements - apparently this is clearly not the case!

Although it is so very irrelevant what was on the website and frankly none of your, literal, business, I feel compelled to explain the material as it seems to have caused a lot of grief at the Fringe and by consequence, quite frankly, pretty much have destroyed our production.

To correct what you stated above, it was NOT on the CasioNova MySpace page - it was on a page at casionova.org, our personal site. The statement was written in haste - so yes it was factually incorrect - I didn't accurately remember what the Fringe cut on ticket sales was and was out one dollar, for that I sincerely apologise and admit I was wrong and sorry if that error caused anyone distress, though I find it difficult to see how that can be the case.

Now, the function of the statement. First, I have a small computer screen - the statement when rendered on my screen could only be seen if one scrolled down below the poster for the show which had all the relevent information, I am aware that only a small proportion of website viewers view material that can only be seen by scrolling. My site is VERY obscure with very little traffic - it is a fan site and that statement by being in that position on my site (as opposed to MySpace) was directed to fans of the show.

I know who these people are, I know my market, in fact many our friends and other artists who care about our well being - by telling them to purchase tickets at the door it was merely telling them that it would help us and our show out more - which is something they would desire. It is quite incorrect to say that it reflected badly on our show - from feedback that statement has been responded to very positively by our target market.

Also it was a crude tracking system to assess effectiveness of publicity - if we got bookings through the Fringe system we would assume that was solely from mass media and from being in the Fringe itself. The statement on the website could help us delineate who came to the show from our online marketing efforts (which was the only marketing we could afford - we had no budget) and those who came via more traditional means. We could then assess where our audience was coming from and the effectiveness of being in the Fringe, for future productions.

Even though the figure of the cut itself was inaccurate, as Hubert stated 'putting a sour taste for us here (in the fringe office)' seemed to be more related to revealing the costs for artists to be in the Fringe. I suppose this has more to do with issues of transparency between your organisation, the artists, the audiences and the general public - which is the realm of the board and the staff rather than us as artists.

> Again, I am sorry that you have not enjoyed your experience with Melbourne
> Fringe and I hope you understand that our systems are in place to ensure
> clarity for artists and audiences.

Again, what we do not understand is why these two things occurred:

We do not wish to take this any further - we are burnt out and are aware that we have inadvertently touched some sore points in an organisation that is much more financially equipped and respected than we can ever be. Those sore points must emanate from somewhere else, perhaps even unintended eventualities of the core model the festival follows. You are, as we are now also, of course painfully aware that as a 20 year old organisation there has to be ingrained structural issues that impact on daily operations. We have little idea what these are, for these are things your organisation has to address.

We are not fighting you, we are not your enemies, we did not wish ill will on the Fringe or the staff.
-----------------------------------------------

Next Page - Alternatives for Artists & Festivals

Previous Page - The Story PART TWO

Back to Introduction Page