Paying for your child to be in panto?

[beanie-bean]

My dd has been in a 3 pantos with 2 different production companies and has never had to pay a fee before. However a local theatre is using a different production company who are going to charge all successful candidates for being in the show. Being part of a professional production is a privilige, and I understand that many production companies struggle financially. However the juvenille dancers do tend to sell lots of tickets to their family and friends. Seems like this production company is just looking to make as much money as possible on the back of children performers. No wonder they were able to out-bid other production companies! My dd certainly will not be auditioning.

[paulears]

This practice is not perceived in the production business as very 'honourable' - but usually gives workshops and other practical activities as part of the deal. However, I find it rather distasteful, and the paid performers rarely like the idea - but it does generate extra revenue streams, and when things are tight, it's understandable.

Panto can be extremely expensive to mount, and for smaller production companies the temptation to squeeze a little out of the kids is too much. From the production perspective, it also causes grief because the parents tend to be far more demanding and want something for their money. I like to deal with a local dance school, who get a fee for providing the kids and chaperones and managing the licensing - and quite frankly the idea of managing the kids would put me off completely. I have more trouble as a manager from the young people than I do from any other member of the cast. It's not the kids faults - but some parents drive me to almost insanity. Having them banging on the door moaning about not getting value for money would kill me off!

[tikto]

is there never any payment to the child for actually being in a panto? just wondered. thanks

[paulears]

Yes - very often there is. To be fair, with my own company, much depends on the dance schools - some pay the kids a token sum at the end, others don't. I've not come across the kids being paid direct, but that's mainly because they are not considered employees individually - with all the tax issues that would cause determining their status. Far easier to pay the dance schools and let them do what they need to do. As long as the number of kids is always the same, I doubt I'd notice if one of team A was in with team B for an extra performance breaking the rules. I just head count, and get on with the rest! Some schools are very strict on the license conditions in terms of hours, some don't seem to worry at all.

I think the kids should get something for their efforts, but we do tend to treat them as a 'clump' never individuals. The concept of charging them just seems very wrong somehow, devaluing what they do.

In truth, after 80 odd shows, the only thing I notice is the iffy ones, who still haven't got it.

[beanie-bean]

Thanks for your comments Paulears. Its nice to hear things from a different view point.

My dd has been in 3 pantos with 2 different production companies. One company gave the children a 'gift' of a small amount of cash, some free tickets and also threw them a party. The other gave each child a more substantial sum but nothing else. I know anther company gives its babes a free DVD of the show and some free tickets.

Its always nice for the children to get something for their efforts but to be honest they do get a lot out of performing in a panto. They learn about commitment, make wonderful friends and get to work with some great people. My dd's confidence grew from panto, as did her sense of performance. Its a great exprience and she loves it. However we draw the line at actually paying for the privilage.

[paulears]

The other thing to think about is appreciation. Money is one thing, and tghere's never enough, but the appreciation thing is the key. A party, or presents, or a little money show thyat the kids input was appreciated, and they counted as part of the show's production value. If you are paying to take part, then you are not part of the production, you're in essence a visitor paying for the priviledge of being on stage having fun. The same thing applies to the companies offering stage experience by putting a show on in a major theatre, but funding it by charging everyone to take part. Sure, it's excellent experience - but the purpose of the venture appears to be to make money, and the taking part is a happy by-product.

There is a parallel with oddly, parachuting. To be a sports parachutist is an expensive hobby - both the indivduals and the company offering it. They take in the charity jumpers, who pay for the chance to jump and raise money for worthy causes. However, the charity jumpers are subsiding thew costs for the sports jumpers. Training is minimal, as they're strapped to experienced people - but it is fun. Charity jumps are a way to reduce costs elsewhere - the same as paying for performing. As such, it can be argued thsat nobody loses out - but the truth seems to be that the companies don't see the paying people (performers and parachutists) as 'real' - they're just very useful people serving a purpose.

If you'd paid to perform, and couldn't make the show for any reason, would they have a panic? Doubtful, I think - they have your non-refundable money, and your contribution in terms of the production as a whole is probably less than those performers who are really part of the team.

It's always good experience - just a little 'separated'.

[pollypickles]

The company that my DDs have been involved with for the past 5 years always charge a nominal fee of about £20 to go towards costumes. As the lead chaperone also I have a bit of an understanding of the huge costs involved in putting on such a production and believe me the fee goes no-where near the final costume costs. The kids do not receive payment but always get free tickets and we have a huge party at the end of the run for them. My DDs adore being in the panto and it would not be Christmas in out house if we didn't all get involved. I also chaperone for them and seeing first hand what the children get out of being involved in a professional production cannot be described in words. One little girl who I recently chaperoned just grew in confidence before your eyes and had the time of her life, that's surely why our kids do this? Roll on panto season

[Coco]

I suppose it's a bit like paying to be in a Youth Theatre Project. I know a lot of people complain about paying the fee for the ones my dd has performed in, but the fee goes nowhere near the amount it costs to put on the production. The costs of which run into thousands ! The theatre never manages to break even, although they play to almost full houses for the 6 performances. I suppose the only difference is, that the adults are being paid in this case. Hopefully though some of the kids will one day be the adults being paid, having honed their skills and gained invaluable experience as a child performer.

[mum43]

We have two local theatres where the children can audition each year for panto. One theatre has a production company that pays the children, the other doesn't, however they do have a party and each child has a free ticket so they can go and see the panto themselves. All this is known upfront so you know what they are getting if they are successful.

Most of the children will go to the theatre that auditions first, then will go to the other if they weren't successful at the first. I don't think they care what they are going to get given, they just want to be in the panto!

My children loved the experience and will definately do it again, even if we had to pay a fee towards costumes.

I personally just wanted them to be somewhere where they are safe and get as much out of the experience as possible. It can be an eye opener when they see how much hanging around there is, but they think it's worth it for the time on the stage!

[cops22]

Our panto is a big pro production but the kids don't actually get paid.... they got 2 comp tickets, a party, signed programme and £50 towards expenses.....
I know that it's not alot for the 2 months that they do but to be honest they have such an amazing time, the competition is really fierce to get in, hundreds of disappointed kids that they do not care one bit about the money etc the sum they get is a nice bonus at the end of a brilliant season and on the last day all they are talking about is auditioning to get in again next year!!

I think if people are charging then it needs to be that they are covering costs and it should be a non profit organisation ie am dram etc then it is ok but if the company is making a profit from what the kids are paying then I disagree with it totally.

[paulears]

They won't be making a profit, but they may well be offsetting the money against possible losses. Maximising their income stream, is the current buzz word.

It's not really much different from the chance many kids get to perform in the West end, where it costs a fair bit to see them up there on stage, on a dark day in a busy theatre. These shows are frequently pretty poor, where as a panto can be a useful experience. You just need to decide if you like the moral issues - working hard but paying for it. I don't like it at all - but if it becomes more and more common, other production companies could see it as a acceptable extra source of income. Many production companies are working in venues that are too small to generate the kind of box office the show costs. I can easily see how the money is tempting!