Violinist Holly Mulcahy posted an article at Neo Classical on 3/4/2013 titled Imaginary Program Notes: What We Can Learn From Children that examines the value in foisting less structure on our listeners. It’s loaded with just the right amount of “Duh” realizations we all need to hear from time to time.

I won’t spoil the details for each spontaneous moment of inspiration (A.KA. the Duh moment) but suffice to say, it’s well worth your time. Once you’re done reading the post, leave a comment there (or pop back here!) and chime in on what you took away from the post and how it might help shape a better concert experience at your organization.

Read  Imaginary Program Notes: What We Can Learn From Children

When The Venture Platform was launched in the fall of 2010, its success or failure rested squarely on an economy of scale business model that kept profit margins low and focused on incredibly solid code and unmatched service. If all went according to plan, users would benefit from an ongoing stream of upgrades and improvements without paying for them by way of annual fee increases.

It is enormously pleasing to say that the risk has not only paid off, but produced far better results than originally projected.

At the beginning of 2013, we launched the first major upgrade to the system, Venture 2.0, which brought along a number of substantial enhancements:

An enterprise-class e-Commerce engine. Venture Commerce delivers a comprehensive shopping cart and checkout experience while also letting users mange orders, track customers, and monitor inventory in real-time. Although it isn’t designed to replace your box office although we already have users who are identifying creative ways to fill holes in their existing ticket selling solution. For example, users who have to use a service from their primary venue don’t always have (or can’t afford the added costs) a solution to sell straightforward ticketing to events at other locations or to sell subscription packages. Venture Commerce steps in to fill those gaps.

Doubled the amount of direct design controls. Venture already provided more direct control of site design and page layouts than any other solution available and we’ve taken that lead and expanded on it.

An additional email marketing provider. In addition to our existing provider at Vertical Response, users can also opt for an account through MailChimp. Plus we still let users take advantage of the five percent opt-out discount if they want to use their own third party provider.

Dozens of new service add-ons. One thing we discovered very early on is instead of passing along development and maintenance costs to all users for what is easily considered niche functionality, users loved having the ability to enhance their system via inexpensive add-ons. This meant they could pick and choose the ones they want and for more than half of our users, they don’t opt for any add-ons at all.

Designer Themes. We went beyond the traditional concert of ready-made themes within the primary publishing platform to begin using highly customized versions that provide a huge amount of “wow” impact for minimal effort. For example, users that benefit from a number of stunning photographs have been making good use of the Venture Scrollider (like this user).

Venture Artists; a brand new service plan. Designed especially for artists and small ensembles, the new plan provides the same managed, hosted, and supported solution organizational users receive but with a hosting plan, email marketing solution and price point better suited to their needs.

New post types and homepage modules. One of the things users mentioned most often when designing their site was uncertainty about what to do with homepage content. We helped cut through the noise by creating special homepage modules that automatically generate content from existing events data or from one or more of our special portfolio or features post types (think of them like content shortcuts that provide complex page layout displays and auto index pages with minimal user input).

On top of all this, we included more than 200 improvements and enhancements to existing functionality and a host of additional under the hood, geek-speak updates that users will likely never see, but appreciate by never getting stuck with incompatibility problems.

Here’s The Best Part

We put all of these improvements in place without needing to raise fees one single dime! That’s right, users pay exactly what they did when we launched in 2010 and the way things are going, we don’t plan on raising prices next year either.

Moreover, our one-off custom development fees have remained flat as well and we managed to implement all of the 2.0 upgrades at zero additional cost to all users, although that doesn’t mean some didn’t take advantage of the time to put some improvements in place :)

Huge Growth

• By the end of 2012, we doubled our existing users and launched our first performing arts service organization site: The Institute of Outdoor Drama (a very cool project with multiple microsites).
• After launching the Venture Artist accounts in 2013, that number doubled again by the end of February.
• Currently, we have six users in various stages of site development including another service organization (you’ll have to wait and see who when they launch by the end of March, 2013).

With all this work, we’ve it took us a bit to get around to updating Venture’s own site with all of the post 2.0 update info. But we have (most) of it done, including a vastly expanded User Portfolio with all sorts of insight about each project.

Hey, This Is Really Fun!

From a personal perspective, working with each client on a year-round basis for more than a full season has not only been a genuinely rewarding experience but it is downright fun. It doesn’t matter what an individual user’s skill level is when they start, they all get to experience a number of light-bulb moments when they uncover something new and cool to do with the Venture.

When we launched, one of the goals was to let users spend less time asking “how do I fix this” and more time asking “what’s the best way I can make this idea work?” It’s all about turning creative capital into actionable ideas and Venture’s users have reinforced what I already knew: there’s no shortage of creativity in the field, it just needs providers to help let it off the chain.

And in the end, of all the seriously cool features Venture offers, the support is what our users talk about the most. And there’s simply no way to express how terrific that makes us feel.

Looking Ahead

Venture is all about moving forward and remaining future-proof. To that end, we maintain a running list of user input suggestions to fit into our organic development cycle but we also stay abreast of industry standards so that arts organizations and artists can finally have tools that stay on the bleeding edge of the technology curve instead of playing perpetual catch up.

Looking in our rear view mirror at our first major waypoint it’s clear that Venture has been an unmitigated success. And now that we’re shifting the economy of scale model into a higher gear, it’s only going to get better.

Here’s our recently updated Venture Is promo video (we’ve got a slew of mini-mercials coming out soon so stay tuned).

During orchestral labor disputes, there is no shortage of tactics employed by both sides to distribute static messages to the general public, but few can try your patience more than the conventional editorial commentary found in traditional news outlets. To be fair, the warring factions aren’t to blame here, they’re merely taking advantage of a third party communication vehicle to deliver their talking points; instead, the outlets are to blame.

For those on the outside looking in, one of the most common byproducts during prolonged labor disputes is mounting irritation over a lack of responsiveness from all parties involved. Those suffering the most from work stoppages have little to no ability to engage either party in meaningful discourse; in its place, they have to chew through regurgitated talking points and one way communications.

But in a day and age when two-way social interaction is as common as fries with your burger, the phenomenon that is the contemporary orchestral labor dispute appears to be exempt. Overall, that’s a real shame since even though it is far from perfect, the practice of corporate accountability via social media blowback is a tangible force for positive change.

Why then do traditional media outlets allow representatives the opportunity to express their talking points in a relatively unedited format without also requiring them to engage in any ensuing public reaction?

Case In Point

On 2/26/2013, MPRNews.com published a commentary piece written by Lloyd Kepple, who in his capacity as a Minnesota Orchestra Association (MOA) board member was acting as a spokesperson for the MOA.

MPRNews.com allows readers to post comments and in exchange for that privilege, the reader must create an account and agree with MPR’s terms and conditions before posting. It’s an entirely reasonable exchange and helps foster a meaningful discussion environment while simultaneously marginalize trolling.

Kepple’s commentary post generated a good bit of comments (25 at the time this article was written) but nowhere in the discussion thread did Kepple or any other MOA representative (or for that matter official musician representative) respond.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that MPR requires commentary authors to actually engage with the readers they are attempting to reach. Therein lies the rub.

Simply put, failing to require commentary authors to engage with readers is tantamount to willful exploitation for commercial gain. Sure, the outlets want provocative commentary and they want readers to get upset and send in comments because it means more traffic and (hopefully) more revenue.

But in this instance, how does this policy help make the MOA labor dispute any better? Kepple’s article didn’t contain any new information; it was simply the latest repackaging of the same old talking points that have been circulated for the past several months.

How Things Should Work

Ever since the onset of comments and discussion threads, Adaptistration has maintained an Equal Time Guarantee policy that provides any individual or organization mentioned in one of its posts the right to respond in an unedited reply. However, in order to take advantage of what is a very generous policy when compared to traditional media outlets, they need to embrace the concept of two-way civil discussion.

In order to ensure accuracy and that every side to each issue is explored in detail, any individual or person officially representing an organization featured in an Adaptistration article is allowed to submit a response which will be published, unedited. Responses are limited to 200 words and must address the issues at hand and the individuals and/or organizations must also be willing to maintain an open dialog for continued discussion. In lieu of this option, individuals may opt for submitting a comment, which is subject to the terms above.

If you aren’t willing to examine, defend, and relate with your audience, then you have no business enjoying the exposure provided by media outlets.

Ultimately, if MPR didn’t encourage and accept comments, this would be a non-issue. But that’s not the case and rest assured, MPR is far from alone on this issue; in fact, I don’t know of a single traditional media outlet that allows reader comments and maintains a required dialog requirement for commentary authors (if one exists, I’d love to know about it and I will promptly correct this post to give credit where credit is due!).

Isn’t it high time you started demanding more from your information providers?

After suffering a brain hemorrhage during his performance of the Strauss Oboe Concerto, San Francisco Symphony Orchestra Principal Oboist William Bennett passed away. Bennett served as the orchestra’s Principal Oboist for 26 years but was a member of the orchestra 34 years.

The orchestra released a statement on 2/28/2013 and there have been numerous articles recounting his career, accomplishments, and consummate musicianship.

H/T to Brian Wise at WQXR for posting this wonderful clip of Bennett performing the oboe solo from Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No. 4.

The 2/26/2013 edition of the New York Times published an article by Daniel J. Wakin that reports the Metropolitan Opera is lowering ticket prices by 10 percent but the really interesting part here is the reason behind the decision.

According to the article, The Met “decided they made going to the opera too expensive.”

So in a rarity in the rarefied world of the performing arts, the Met said it would reduce ticket prices next season. The average cost of admission will drop by 10 percent, or to $156 from $174, Peter Gelb, the general manager, said in a recent interview.

The article continues with additional insight from Gelb but in a nutshell, it appears that The Met determined recent increases were responsible for the lion’s share of audience decrease and the expected bump in income was offset by the overall drop.

We’ve examined this issue before when via the ticket price topic where organizations attempt to fill drops in revenue by artificially increasing average prices. Most groups expect average attendance numbers to drop but the increase in earned income is usually enough to justify the decision.

The problem here is that this approach is only productive via short term implementation and should only be used as a tactic of last resort during periods of crisis management. Instead, some performing arts orgs have been internalizing this as a long term policy and if left unchecked, many groups will cross a tipping point where the attendance falloff accelerates faster than any reasonable price hikes can keep up.

Painting Your Way Out Of The Corner

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the trend of average audience decline was exacerbated by the economic downturn. As a result, groups adopted price increases as a short term strategy to help manage cash flow but this isn’t something most groups can sustain for more than five years. And the longer groups continue with artificially inflated average ticket price strategies, the harder it is to back away from them without causing just as much damage.

In short, it is like painting yourself into a corner with a prolonged lie.

On one hand, an organization has to justify price increases and the longer those increases remain, the firmer the reasons become. But once the group crosses the threshold of diminishing returns, how do they back away without contradicting everything that came before to justify the previous increases?

Simple, they can’t; and more to the point, they shouldn’t. For now, the Met is taking the right approach by chalking it up as an error.

Mind The Bear Traps

During the transition, The Met will need to be mindful of maintaining overall revenue goals. Granted, that’s a profoundly obvious point but it is good to see The Met referencing it in Wakin’s article. According to the report, The Met is apparently relying on added sales to help fill any revenues holes related to the price correction and since that group isn’t too far along in the artificial increase game, they stand a good chance at reaching those goals.

At the same time, and in an ideal strategy, they have a backup plan to help subsidize slower than predicted gains with temporary bumps in contributed revenue.

Case in point for how a group shouldn’t implement a price correction strategy, when the St. Paul Chamber Orchestra (SPCO) instituted big cuts across the board for ticket prices, they did so without any firm plan in place to offset a known drop in revenue. There were assumptions that unearned income would increase but it never materialized to necessary levels.

As a result, the group hobbled along via a series of budget cuts until they arrived at where they are now: a bitter work stoppage and the strong likelihood of losing all but a shred of the 2012-13 season.

Conclusions

It will be fascinating to see how things unfold for The Met’s new strategy; likewise, reaction across the field will be equally fascinating. After all, if The Met successfully demonstrates that the strategy works and prices were increasing too fast, how will that make peers with similar price increases and audience decreases look?

Then there’s potential concern that The Met may be attempting to use the ticket correction announcement as a way of deflecting attention from other strategic decisions that may have more to do with recent revenue shortfalls. Reader May Catherine expressed those very concerns in a pair of comments to yesterday’s post on this topic.

Simply put, those sorts of concerns could be accurate and if so, the real loss will be the missed opportunity to examine the artificial ticket price syndrome outside the confines of closed doors and hushed tones.

More on this tomorrow but the 2/26/2013 edition of the New York Times published an article by Daniel J. Wakin that reports the Metropolitan Opera has announced that they are lowering ticket prices by 10 percent. Acknowledging that the prices have risen to artificially high levels and were now counterproductive for raising revenue and increasing access, the Met is acting proactively. We’ve been discussing these issues for years now and seeing the Met’s decision is a welcome breath of fresh air. More on this tomorrow, in the meantime, be sure to read Wakin’s article.

What musician doesn’t dream of rising to fame by filling in at the very last moment for a featured soloist to rave reviews? After all, it worked for Toscanini and that lighting has to strike again at some point in time, right? It just so happens that it struck again in New Orleans via the Louisiana Philharmonic’s principal clarinet, Christopher Pell.

The 7/25/2013 edition of nola.com published an article by Chris Waddington with all the details but in a nutshell, Pell filled in as soloist for Copland’s Clarinet Concerto with only a few minutes’ notice and not only rose to the occasion, but by all accounts knocked it out of the park.

As a result, the orchestra’s music director, Carlos Miguel Prieto, decided to personally sponsor a wildcat matching gift campaign through March 31, 2013 (details and donate).

In a season with so much dark news, it’s genuinely wonderful when the occasional ray of sunshine breaks through!

There was an intriguing article by Doug Grow in the 2/22/2013 edition of MinnPost.com that examines the numerous political connections between the cast of characters involved in the Minnesota Orchestra Association (MOA) and St. Paul Chamber Orchestra (SPCO) lockouts. The premise of the article wonders about the lack of direct involvement from Twin Cities political leaders in resolving the disputes.

It’s refreshing to see a mainstream media outlet dive into the deep end on these issues. Historically, political power players have had wildly varying degrees of involvement and effectiveness in bringing about as positive of a resolution as possible but one thing you should avoid is assume they have zero influence.

Grow’s article speculates the lack of involvement from local elected officials resembles something of a see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil ballet in that the issues are running hot enough that expending any real clout could be the final straw in an already tenuous quid pro quo system.

Making matters more difficult for pols to take strong sands is the reality that the boards of these two orchestras are made up of the region’s biggest movers and shakers. Politicians don’t go out of their way to upset such people as Jon Campbell, who is the chairman of the Minnesota Orchestra’s board of directors and executive vice president of Wells Fargo, and Richard Davis, CEO of US Bancorp, who was past chair of the orchestra board.

One clear exception to this, which Grow mentions, is the Grammy celebration concert hosted by Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak and long time orchestra supporter (an according to Grow, aunt to the current MN governor) Judy Dayton. Another is the growing interest from the Minnesota House Legacy Committee, which we examined here on 2/14/2013.

As for the latter, MOA President and CEO Michael Henson’s testimony made it clear that the organization wasn’t terribly concerned about what the committee thought or might do but the former incident apparently struck a collective MOA nerve.

Grow published what he describes as a “smug note” from Henson to the MOA board shortly after the Grammy celebration concert was announced.

“Today Mayor R.T. Rybak and Judy Dayton issued an invitation to Osmo [conducter Osmo Vänskä] and the musicians to perform a concert at the Convention Center, February 1, conducted by Osmo Vänskä. … While we expected to use the Grammy nomination to maximize their arguments about the importance of art, we did not expect this.”

In the same note, Henson scoffed at Minneapolis.

“As you are all aware,” he wrote to the board members, “the City of Minneapolis does not provide any funding to the Minnesota Orchestra.”

Grow continues by pointing out a number of practical flaws in Henson’s assertion regarding city support but the larger issue the MOA should be considering here is how far do they want to push the “we’re right, and they’re wrong” style of talking points.

In the end, all of this is yet another strong indication that the MOA labor dispute has degraded to a point where the only way to win, is to make someone else lose. In short, everyone loses in that sort of scenario.

Ultimately, it is rare for anyone to recall specific winners and losers a decade down the road. All they see is the horribly disfigured and dysfunctional arts organization that willfully embraced cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Renowned cellist and Inside The Arts author Lynn Harrell published an article today announcing that after 50 years of making music together, he has decided to sell his 1720 Montagnana. The post recounts his time purchasing the instrument in 1962 but one of the real highlights is a particular line that is just about the best example I’ve come across that embodies the very unique relationship between a musician and his/her instrument.

What I learned early on is an instrument of great character needs a strong personality in its player to bring out the best of its voice and resonance. ~ Lynn Harrell

Overall, the article is decidedly a historical account of Harrell’s time with the cello but done in such a way that it comes across more as a genuinely touching tribute.

Most musicians performing on an instrument of this caliber are purely users in that one or more benefactors, or a foundation, actually own the instrument. Consequently, given how rare it is to see a musician live in both of those roles, the article is decidedly unique and certainly worth your while.

The March, 2013 edition of Chicago Magazine features an article titled “100 Most Powerful Chicagoans” and my first thought was “I wonder how many from the list serve on local performing arts boards?” Imagine how pleasing it was to see that one of the related featurettes, “It’s Cozy at the Top,” connected those very dots in a convenient infographic.

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/March-2013/Cozy-at-the-Top/

Out of the five high profile arts orgs in Chicago included in the magazine’s criteria:

• Chicago Symphony Orchestra: Fifth Place with 3/12 members; Nos. 18, 44, & 58
• Lyric Opera of Chicago: Third Place with 5/12 members; Nos. 4, 12, 69, 76, & 87

If your city doesn’t have a handy reference like the list from Chicago Magazine, it is always worth your while to begin compiling one then setting about the task of making connections.

Sure, it’s one thing to have a firm sense of who’s who but I have yet to encounter an instance in all my years of consulting where charting these sorts of connections out doesn’t produce some meaningful realization. From a board development perspective, it can be particularly useful on a host of different levels.

I’ve worked with charting projects that sparked a healthy competitive spirit in some board members which, in turn, was converted to positive results for the organization. The most gratifying scenarios are those that help board members move away from zero sum perspectives about resources and potential and move toward something capable of realizing something more than sum of its parts.