…but potentially bad PR for other artists.
Pianist Emanuel Ax has waived two concert fees for the Columbus Symphony this weekend.
This is an unquestionably classy and genuine act, but I have to wonder: does it set a dangerous precedent for soloists going forward? Hefty artist fees are often blamed for high concert ticket prices, so will fee-waiving be expected, or – worse – will artists who do not play with orchestras that can’t afford their fees be perceived as greedy by the concert-going public? Also, can Mr. Ax/will Mr. Ax write the fees off as donations? Because that opens an entirely different can of worms…
Again, Mr. Ax has proved himself to be incredibly generous, it’s just a complicated issue.
What I’m most curious about, actually, is why the orchestra made the information public.
Thinking out loud update, Saturday 3/21 morning: Perhaps the Columbus Symphony made the news public in hopes that the resulting publicity buzz (to which I am fully aware I am contributing) would spur new and old donor support. “If an artist like Emanuel Ax is supporting us, we’re worth supporting and you should, too.” Could a better way to have handled this have been for Mr. Ax to accept the fee(s) and then publicly donate them back to the orchestra without naming the sum, or explaining that the donation was his fees? The orchestra could have then listed him as a donor going forward. Although that, too, has its complications: will orchestras only hire artists who are major donors? Does that basically mean you can pay to play? Would his management have accepted commission? If so, would his management have had to donate their commission? Can artist managers ethically make donations to orchestras?
I was under the impression that artists were not allowed to do gigs for nothing for precisely the reasons you outlined. Of course, this just reveals my ignorance about how fees are decided upon.
Are soloists part of a union or is it just every man for himself, negotiating whatever the market will bear?
As far as artists not playing with orchestras who can’t afford their fees….doesn’t this happen already as a matter of course?
I’ve always been rather curious about how this part of the business works.
I’m with you on wondering why the orchestra made this public though. It is a rather curious decision and seems like it would cause more problems than it solves.
Will other orchestras start to pressure soloists to do the same? From what I hear, it’s already happening; many artist managers are feeling the pressure to cut fees.
It’s not a black & white issue, but in the case of the top earners, there should be some sense of collective sacrifice. Artists like Yo-Yo Ma, Josh Bell, Renee Fleming and others make upwards of $60K or $70K per performance. Presenters feel they have to pay these fees because their audiences expect top-rank soloists. But this effectively eats their entire budget and as a result, it’s harder for younger, up-and-coming soloists to break in to series.
I’d bet that Ax could write that off as a donation to the orchestra though…
Brian, presenters pay high fees for artists like Ax, Bell, Fleming, Ma and Perlman because the revenue they generate leaves a net contribution much greater than normal. (Unless of course you are selling out every performance, regardless of who is performing.) Anyone who sets a guest artist budget for a season without looking at the individual impact on revenues is missing opportunities – at both the superstar and the emerging artist levels.
Seems to me that it would be ill-chosen for any orchestra or other entity to ask an A List soloist to play for free except for a major benefit performance for a very, very good charitable cause. And if a performer does perform gratis, revealing this certainly should be only by mutual agreement.
Somehow I doubt that the Columbus Symphony told Manny (or his agent) that they’d like to have him but couldn’t pay him, but it would be typical of him to refuse to accept a fee and maybe even expenses to help out in this situation. And of course he and any other performer who does this should write it off on their taxes — unless they consider the government a good cause.
As for artists not playing for orchestra who can’t afford their fees, this depends totally on the situation and the artist. When a situation involves someone or something close to a performer’s heart, it is not uncommon for the artist to offer his/her services gratis or at a reduced fee, usually friend to friend or through a third party. Performers who aren’t comfortable doing this should not be thought less of. How wonderful it is, though, that there are those such as Emmanuel Ax who have the means and inclination to go to venues where the audiences would otherwise not be able to enjoy the experience of a live performance by a major talent.
I don’t think you have to worry about precedents in this situation. Manny Ax is an exceptional person without exception. He comes from a real background where he knows what it’s like to work very hard to barely make ends meet, perhaps more than other artists on the market now, particularly big name artists. It’s his big Polish Jewish heart. Mr. Ax is a genuine exception in this business and at this point in his career can afford to give back some of what he’s amassed in fees. I highly doubt whether he will make a habit of giving up his fees as a charitable and unselfish act. And I highly doubt whether he needs the publicity for an occasional instance of generosity and understanding in these times.
Last week in Kansas City, the Guarneri and Johannes Quartets donated their fees back to the Friends of Chamber Music. I have no doubt that many artists fees (exceopt at the very tip top) will be negotiated lower. I also think this leaves room for worthy up and coming artists to be booked due to their lower fees.
As for the tax consequences, i believe if an artist just waives his fee, he gets no tax deduction. If an artist collects a fee which is income, and then donates it back, he takes a deduction. In both cases, the net result is zero for the artist and a wash.