What's on?

[Jon Ashley]

There are other expenses that you'll see come FW. We're not doing anything that breaks CCFWC agreements.

[liveross]

Originally Posted by Jon Ashley

In regards to the QM being more "niche"... err, what?

How is Goldie Lookin' Chain more niche than Dizzee Rascal? How is Cheesy Pop more niche than Dave Pearce? That doesn't make any sense what so ever.

And as far as what's going on through our minds: we're trying something different.

Jon I mean the QM is a more niche union. When you think about GU you think about Dance, Hive, Cheap Drink... when you think of the QM you think more of live bands, more relaxed atmosphere.... You guys certainly have niche marketing because you provide revolution (which the GU and most other clubs don't), and you also decide not to stock certain food products...

Originally Posted by MC Kelly

By intentionally presenting our clubnights as our weekly nights, no nonsense, we're showing a whole new yeargroup of potential QMers that this is us, like it or lump it, but we reckon you'll like it.

And the thousands of members who've joined over the last year obviously agreed that yeah, it's pretty decent up our way.

... "like it or lump it" - what kind of expression is that to be making when your a boardmember?

... I'm sorry, but honestly, the only good thing about the QM at the moment is the food and the pool. I've not had a good night out at Cheesy in months. Ask any of my QM member friends (i speak reguarly to about 20 of them) and they all say the same thing.

Maybe you guys should try and ask what your members want, rather than deciding that we should just "like it or lump it".

What a messy way to go about things.

[Semprini]

Originally Posted by raikje

i fear that freshers will always remember the "big names" they saw above anything else.

This can backfire - "Oh for Christ's sake, not Shed Seven AGAIN!"

[raikje]

Originally Posted by Jon Ashley

There are other expenses that you'll see come FW. We're not doing anything that breaks CCFWC agreements.

i wasn't accusing the qm of breaking any agreements, i was just hoping there's some good things still in the bag and that GLC aren't getting paid £15k

but never fear, whatever you do caley will always be worse:

Friday 28th September - Evening - Babyshambles DJ set in the Venue Bar.

[erithromycin]

I hate to sound like a bitter voice of experience, but, no wait, that's what I am.

These are the same fucking arguments that have been had time and time again. I first heard them in 1999, when this year's Freshers' were in Primary 5, and I've evidence that they were had in the early seventies, when Toast first went to university. Freshers' Week is a huge investment for both Unions, an unmitigated administrative boondoggle clusterfuck for all involved.

There are three measures that are traditionally used to judge the success of Freshers' Week: How many come in the door on the night, public opinion afterwards, and membership in the Unions.

Door figures aren't a good measure for a few reasons. The number of Freshers' Passes sold has exceeded the total capacity of both Unions before. With the abolition of Week 0 (again), Freshers have stuff to do during the day, so don't stay out at night. Freshers move between the two Unions all the time, they'll go to the GUU for one thing, back to the QM for another. The Unions hope to break even, but it's easy to say that the dancefloor is half empty, so the night is a failure - if every one of those folk has a brilliant time and joins the Union, is it?

Public opinion I won't even start on, because it should be evident from this thread that people are capable of interpreting the same thing in different ways, and that the answers you receive depend on the questions that you ask. If that isn't clear to you, then I strongly suggest remedial learning.

Membership of the Unions isn't a great measure, because people will join Unions for a variety of reasons, and with the profusion of 'student nights' and the sheer quantity of opportunities to go out and get ones academically inclined drink on is greater than it's been for a long time. I mean, generic 3am licenses? You don't know you're born! After the 2001 Freshers' Week, the QM's membership was about double what it had been the year before. That's a success, I'd say. Similarly, while the GUU's membership figures have remained relatively static (and that's not a bad thing, I hasten to add), the QM's have continued to climb. Oh, aye, the rate is slowing, but there has been a cultural shift in the last decade that has produced an equivalency of membership between the two Unions. Whether that's a good or a bad thing isn't really my place. What's clear, though, is that levels of involvement in the Union have suffered, at least proportionally - there's about as many folk who volunteer at either Union as there ever were, but now that there's so many more folk in a position to do so at the QMU it looks a little worse. Nonetheless, I'd say that you can't judge these things in advance - the only reasonable measure is the membership figures, and I'd give them to October - to be frank, it doesn't matter what you as an individual think, because you are sufficiently different to the Freshers' en masse that your opinion can't help but be even an unrepresentative sample, even on a purely statistical basis. They outnumber you by three thousand or so, to start with.

GLC ought to be fun, and it treads carefully that line between mainstream appeal and the alternative credibility the QM seeks to present. Though I have just realised there's likely to be Freshers who weren't born when Nirvana were on the stage of Qudos.

Anyway, I've said all this before, because these are old arguments. It's no use grousing beforehand - if you're not happy with it, join the QM, then volunteer. As with any other voluntary organisation, it can only be as good as you help to make it, so why not knuckle down to some motherfucking assistance, rather than being a whining cunt on a forum, eh?*




[* Hint: Irony Alert!]

[fuckin-yaldie]

Originally Posted by Semprini

And then 6 months later...

Parent: so... how's it all going then?

Fresher: Fucking pish, the big first week was where they spent all their money, there's fuck all on that's any good now.

People seem to have the idea that Cheesy and Rev need extra money spent on them this year? Why? What's wrong with them and how will you make them better by spending money on them? Give away free drinks? I asked this in an earlier post.

THE "BIG FIRST WEEK" IS FRESHERS WEEK

That's the point. One big week long party at which the end of you go "the QM is fucking ace, I'm joining that one".

[fuckin-yaldie]

Originally Posted by erithromycin

Anyway, I've said all this before, because these are old arguments. It's no use grousing beforehand - if you're not happy with it, join the QM, then volunteer. As with any other voluntary organisation, it can only be as good as you help to make it, so why not knuckle down to some motherfucking assistance, rather than being a whining cunt on a forum, eh?*[* Hint: Irony Alert!]

Irony alert noted.

Why don't I volunteer? Why would I want to join the board?. I know without my input freshers week will be good enough at least (as long as there is booze).

All my original point was, was:

GET SOME FUCKING BANDS IN!!!

Am I not allowed to say that without getting the classic "If you don't like how it's run, become a board member" line.


Me: Oi, Gordon Brown! Get those fucking troops out of Iraq!

Gordon: Emm, nah, we like them there.

Me: Well it's a stupid idea because of x, y, z...

Gordon: Well if you don't agree why don't you become Prime Minister!


Big events are what really leave a mark on the fresher, not playing computer games.

[fuckin-yaldie]

Originally Posted by djtoast

So really the best chance of securing a well-known band for a reasonable price is to find someone who's already touring, and slot a date at the QM into their tour - if they have dates anywhere nearby on adjacent days bob's your uncle...

You've got a fair point, but it would only be relevant if the QM had attempted to book some big acts. Instead they're saying "we don't need bands, they're a waste of money". I could accept it if they had tried and failed, but that's not the case.

Originally Posted by djtoast

Plus [/b]the fee and other costs tend to make the financial equation much tighter than people realise. It's not quite as easy as "Book Franz Ferdinand, pay them five grand, sell a thousand tickets at a tenner a head and you've doubled your money"

I agree but that ain't a reason to not try and book bands, whilst working out the numbers properly.

p.s.

Franz Ferdinand is maybe not the best example as they're on tour in Scotland then with free dates during freshers week......

[erithromycin]

Who do you want? There are so many live music venues now that getting bands is difficult, but in fairness it always has been for unions. It's also a bit late now to be trying to get big bands in. Don't get me wrong, there's a place for live music, but it can and does cost a lot, and its return isn't always going to be brilliant. Economically it's dangerous, in terms of satisfaction it's hit and miss, and I submit that it has no effect on membership numbers.

Freshers' Weeks have had bands who were in the top 10 that very week and have earned their union no extra members. The GUU have had wildly different live acts and line-ups over the last decade, but their membership has, as I said, remained largely static. The reason for the inordinate jump in membership of the QM around 2000 was basically because the way in which folks were joined to the Union changed, rather than anything that happened in Freshers' Week. Joint membership from the QM's side has done more for the Union's numbers.

Though joining doesn't really count for shit either. I mean, Strathclyde's got 14000 students, and despite this its Union is a pest-hole with little utility. Participation is the key, and its the day time events like quizzes and getting to know Freshers helpers that have always done the most to recruit those who might volunteer, rather than big bands. That's just my experience, of course - that the real role of Freshers' Week is as a crucible for the forging of talent. It's not for nothing that about half of the last ten QM Presidents were Freshers' Week convenor, and how many Board Members were brought on board in that way.

On top of all that, there's the standard culture of secrecy around band announcements for Freshers' Week. The QM is usually coy about it, and while I give credit to the GUU for announcing their names early I'd still expect things to go wrong.

There is a general opinion among the board, or was last time I checked, that what is vital to the survival of the QM is fostering a sense of community. I believe the role of Social convenor explicitly requires them to provide opportunities for the membership to interact with the union and each other - it's not the Union most folk fall in love with, but the people they meet there. With gigs, the QM is just a venue - I can think of a handful of folk who go to every gig at the 13th Note or King Tut's, but that's not the same as going to the same bar to hang out with the same folk week on week. With social events there's that chance of community.

Call it a philosophical difference. I'll say this though - when I was doing Freshers' Weeks and either Union had a big band (or comedian) on, the Freshers would go to see it and then leave as soon as it was over. Most of the folk I know (which I wouldn't argue is a truly representative sample, but it speaks to my point) joined the Union they joined either because it was the option presented to them (you've no idea how many folk think Glasgow has only one Union), or because their friends joined it.

The bands argument is an old one, a really old one. You're not the only person to have thought as you think, and while I'm not saying you have to be a board member to have an opinion, it is helpful to consider that the board has had these discussions before, that your opinion has echoes there, and that, for whatever reason, they're doing something else.

As for Cheesy and Revolution needing money spent on them, it seems to be the general opinion that while they're as good as they ever were, the numbers of folk going is smaller (significantly so some weeks), and that's a cause for concern. In order to provide services to its members, the QM ought to attempt a surplus, and if people don't go to its clubnights those nights are basically just costing the QM money it could spend more usefully elsewhere.

Remember though, no matter how shit you might think it, at least it's not Banana Man and some cunt off of Big Brother.

[djtoast]

Originally Posted by fuckin-yaldie

p.s.

Franz Ferdinand is maybe not the best example as they're on tour in Scotland then with free dates during freshers week......

That would make them exactly the best possible example.

because even if they are in theory available (not playing a gig that night by no means assures that: aside from rest days there are all sorts of other commitments they could have: media, whatever...) there's no way in hell the QM could put them on in a room the size of Qudos at a price that freshers would wanna ( / be able to) pay.

But for argument's sake, how about you give us a list of bands you think would be suitable, find out what they're doing that week, hell, make up a number for what you think they cost if you like; figure in support acts... Seriously, try it and let us know who we shoulda booked and how the balance sheet woulda looked.

You're implying that the QM didn't BOTHER booking bands; I think it would be truer to say that the ents department, with an awareness of who might be available, decided that the best value that the available resources could buy didn't involve putting on the kind of program you have in mind.

[djtoast]

Originally Posted by erithromycin

As for Cheesy and Revolution needing money spent on them, it seems to be the general opinion that while they're as good as they ever were, the numbers of folk going is smaller (significantly so some weeks), and that's a cause for concern.

I'm far from sure that that's true also; people are very quick to cry "doom" but while Rev has settled at a lower average level than it managed the year that Limp Bizkit was at number one every time you turned around, it's been busy whenever I've been there recently. And Cheesy Pop had one freak year when we first got our 3am licence, and it has dropped back slightly from that level, but in term time you'd have to be Mr Magoo to believe it was anything other than "very busy" every sing;e week.

[erithromycin]

Oh, aye, it's not limping and needing to be shot, but is it hitting capacity as early as it used to? The real issue has never really been competition from other clubs, they've always been around, but competition for the time and inclination of students - lots of folk aren't going to discos these days.

Anyway, no laurel resting.

[Jon Ashley]

There's been a misinterpretation here. The ents department have looked extremely hard for big names acts for Freshers' Week. It's very unfortunate but we have been extremely unlucky.

The acts we could get, however, were wanting too much money for very little.

So we decided to invest the money off big names acts, which is a good idea I think.

[fuckin-yaldie]

Originally Posted by Jon Ashley

There's been a misinterpretation here. The ents department have looked extremely hard for big names acts for Freshers' Week. It's very unfortunate but we have been extremely unlucky.

The acts we could get, however, were wanting too much money for very little.

So we decided to invest the money off big names acts, which is a good idea I think.

Ok well that's not the line that was taken in this thread until now.

The line taken was we don't believe big acts contribute to freshers week and/or the future success of the union (which is a point I can understand but don't agree with).

I can accept no big names if the QM tried to get them in but couldn't, I don't understand why someone didn't say that in the first place though.

Why not just tell the truth (especially as it would go down much better with people who have the similar feelings on freshers week as me) rather then put some kind of spin on it?

You guys are like the labour government.

Originally Posted by djtoast

I'm far from sure that that's true also; people are very quick to cry "doom" but while Rev has settled at a lower average level than it managed the year that Limp Bizkit was at number one every time you turned around, it's been busy whenever I've been there recently. And Cheesy Pop had one freak year when we first got our 3am licence, and it has dropped back slightly from that level, but in term time you'd have to be Mr Magoo to believe it was anything other than "very busy" every sing;e week.

I agree, term-time cheesy pretty much at the same level it has always been at in my three years of uni. Maybe people leave slightly earlier but I might be wrong as for some reason my memory at that point of the night is never too good...

[MC Kelly]

Originally Posted by fuckin-yaldie

... "like it or lump it" - what kind of expression is that to be making when your a boardmember?

What a messy way to go about things.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe I know you, or that you know me. Until such times as you 1) know who I am and 2) know what contribution I've made, you can keep such comments about its messiness or usefulness to yourself.

Similarly, the previous comment about my tendency to snuggle up by the fire with mum instead of enjoying a night out seem entirely irrelevant to the thread.

Now, if it's an introduction you're looking for...hi, I'm Marie-Clare.