Exclusive Venues

[Dukesy 0]

But how come people just accept they have to have the hotels dj even if their not the one they want?

 

Probably for lots of reasons really and I bet there will be several we don't even think of.

 

First of all, they may feel that the Hotel is speaking with some Authority and could be best placed entity to recommend a DJ / service provider. After all, the venue have probably seen through 100's or 1000's of Weddings and witnessed the work and performance of 100's of DJ's, whilst for most clients, it will be the first and only Wedding that they arrange smile icon

 

They are probably happy to put themselves in the hands of the venue in this and other similar respects, thinking that they are recommending from vast experience and will only be providing the best, especially when they are recommending and / or providing service against their own name and reputation.

 

Secondly, most clients don't spend every waking moment on DJ Forums. As I said before, this may be the first time they have had cause to book a DJ, they may only book one or two functions with a DJ in their entire lifetimes. They don't know the law(s) or lack of them and nor do they know about licenses and other red-tape, nor will they have the information to hand in order to question and challenge what the venue is telling them, and since they probably have 50 other things to arrange for their Wedding and a whole stack of invitations to send out, they can hardly be expected to sit on DJU for a few weeks reading the best part of 1/4 million posts.

 

Our cause is also probably not helped by the glut of Association False Prophets amongst us, masquerading as DJ's, whose members constantly hint or even openly misinform clients on their website that if a member doesn't have this or that bit of paper, or is a member of xxxx Association, then they are out and out cowboys and if they book a DJ without all of that red tape or who is cheaper than them or who doesn't use a certain make of equipment, then the four horseman of the apocalypse will hunt them down and put a big dent in their Wedding Night nocturnals.

 

With all of the DJ's out there spouting mis-information via their own websites, I guess its only fair to expect some of the Wedding Venues to also want a piece of the action and start mis-informing clients in respect of DJ's too - perhaps, venues are natural mimics, following the example that some DJ's, themselves are setting.

 

Of course its 'Ok' when its our own ilk doing the mis-informing isn't it? Or when one of our own is knowingly emailing and writing to venues and preaching to clients alike, stating that DJ's operating without a Pro-Dub license are illegal per se and shouldn't be allowed to work in their venue!.

Sure, when this happened a few years ago, we all sat back and do absolutely nothing, united only in silence. The only thing worse, IMO than sharp practices is blatant double standards and glaring hypocrisy!

At the end of the day, if the spotlight was turned on us, would all of our industry pass scrutiny with flying colours eh? Then again, it seems that most of these entities are a member of another cult, perhaps called the "W.B.O.B" (Worshipful Brotherhood Of Bullshitters) these are clearly beyond the reproach of every other DJ in the country as they never get challenged nor blackballed out of any of the Associations despite their shady, underhand practices, and we are all just as guilty of sitting back and doing nothing in this respect, as the client who just books a resident or recommended DJ purely on what excuse the venue tells them is policy, so we are hardly in a position to criticise.

 

I suppose a lot of how far the client will fight and defend their cause against a Venue 'policy' depends on how much they want their own DJ. If its a DJ they have seen or booked previously or otherwise 'know' then they are likely to fight hard for the right to book them, however if they are booking a random DJ who they don't know, then perhaps they are thankful of the venues policy, again thinking that the odds of the venues DJ being much better (in order to keep their employment) rather than playing Russian Roulette with Google.

 

In most cases, the desire to have the Wedding venue they have dreamed of outweighs the desire to book a certain DJ. After all, a lot of the top area venues have a waiting list of Wedding clients, and if the client did walk away purely over a dis-agreement over the venue DJ then the date would probably get rebooked by the venue very quickly, however, the Bride & Groom probably wouldn't want to lose their first choice venue, and may not find it easy to rebook a 2nd venue at short notice, over (in their eyes) such a trivial factor.

So its fair to say that some clients simply wouldn't rock the boat, and others would just take what the venue said as Gospel (in the absence of any proof to the contrary) and some clients probably couldn't give a damn either way!

 

And that's even before considering that even with any additional charges, their DJ might be cheaper than the one the client had considered!

That aside, getting involved with recommending anything or any ‘service’ is a minefield, purely because in the event of something occurring, then everybody remembers EXACTLY who had put them in touch with that entity in the first place and one whose recommendation they trusted.

 

Do note that venues can pretty much insist on the details of THEIR package deals, and can include or leave out pretty much whatever they like.  Also, they can eject services and individuals from their premises for whatever reason, and can insist on requirements to be met by third parties right up to and on the actual day!

 

Lets look at it this way.  In cases where the venue insists that a client pays a certain fee for a ‘service’, but that “service” is pretty ambiguous in the details, then the client obviously has the right to ask the venue further details about that ‘service’.  If the venues reply is unsatisfactory, then the client merely has a simple choice.  Choose the service, or not. 

However, if the ‘service’ in question is included as part of a “package deal” with the venue, then the client may find themselves paying for something they don’t get the benefit of because they still desired the venue!

Given this, if the client wishes to change the terms of the package deal, obviously the client may / will pick up the tab and shortfalls.

 

I'm happy to hear that the Associations are working towards dealing with the venues in this respect, I can't wait for it to get around to 'dealing' with some of their own membership in a similar respect. The ones guilty of mis-representing their professional memberships / accreditations or Pro-Dub in the manner I've described above, the ones acting and squabbling like 6 year olds in their 'professional' attitudes to each other on forums and those starting threads about their clients with PUBLIC forum topics like 'That Bitch from hell' or other derogatory and personal terminology. Yeah, this clean up has been a long time coming and it cannot fail to levy the same scrutiny towards its own membership as it levies towards the venues can it (?), because that would be a case of double standards and would lose all public confidence in what it professes to represent if its own house wasn't in order and its own members clearly found to be dealing in sharp, unethical, misleading or otherwise unprofessional practices which make it harder for the decent folk in the industry to get a fair nights pay in return for a fair nights work.

 

Like I said, it would be far better to encourage an actual client to pursue making a formal complaint, ideally to the head office if the hotel is a chain or directly to the address of the owner of the business if it is privately owned.

[pdarnett 0]

Yikes, first time I answer a post in years and that happens!

 

I'm sure that if you were to lodge a complaint to these " Associations" regarding specific members behaviour as opposed to posting it on a publicly viewable forum, then they might investigate it.

 

The point I was trying to get across was that most venues will fold on this fee if pressed with the right information and if our clients want us instead of the inhouse dj then there IS something we can do about it.

 

More fool me for mentioning casually mentioning NADJ as part of that and not expecting the usual backlash.

[DJTREV 0]

Good posts Dan.There is a lot of merit in what you say.

 

 

 

What day last week did you start thinking and typing that lot out.

[Dukesy 0]

First of all, I'm not hijacking this thread and turning it into 'What is the best DJ Association' thread. I've been careful to refer to the Association Environment generically wherever I refer to it, and therefore any positives and negatives in the points I may make can be silently and anonomously applied to any one or more of the particular associations wherever they may be applicable and where their own members may identify that the need exists.

 

Unfortunately, there is already too much of this Kramer vs Kramer attitude on forums with Associations constantly battling it out between each other and promoting how much superior they are over the next Association, and trying to find petty ways of getting even with the other, even resorting to what could be termed as childishly and publicly badmouthing their rivals.

 

I've even posted an un-named example of one of the 'Accreditation' sites on the DJ Accreditation thread who actively use sweeping phrases like -

"The sign of a quality mobile disco"  and "We would strongly suggest that when hiring a DJ for an important event that you choose one with a current xxxxxx award!"

 

Now, unless this entity had actively booked EVERY member of its membership for a performance and had assessed their level of quality using an independent panel drawn from random members of the public, it remains something of a false statement and entirely misleading, based purely on nothing other than the assumption of the person building the website! Using such misleading and largely unproven terminology is also hardly setting an example to the DJ's they represent is it (?), especially as that DJ will probably go and use the same misleading statement on their own website. Lead by example!

 

Some DJ Associations are pretty similar in putting across the philosophy that their members are in some way superior to the rest of the industry just through the writing of a cheque and that by qualifying for membership by providing copies of pli, pat, pro-dub etc (and of course a cheque payable), that the general public is guaranteed something of a quality, high level of service which would be far superior than the service provided by any non member.

This is inference is complete twoddle of course, and there are plenty of DJ's out there who have operated for 10, 20 or 30 years without any membership to any association / accreditation and still have an enviable wealth of satisfied clients dating back decades, that even some association members can only dream about i'm sure that there are also Dj's out there with all of the paperwork who have let people down or have drawn their own share of complaints.

 

In addition, in nearly every other industry, PAT & PLI like other bills are annual mundane requirements which appear for renewal every year, get paid and then get forgotten about for the next 11 months. For DJ's however its a constant source of exciting marketing material and potential business promotion, an excuse for finger pointing as a reason not to book competitors, and the sole reason why they are a much better DJ than the 1000's of others out there.

 

Having access to paperwork costing a total of a few £100, is no gaurantee of quality nor is it a reference for or a means of re-assurance of both the business and personal integrity of the operator, and making any reference to the fact that a pli certificate is anything more than the fact that the person carries insurance, and membership to a particular Association is some kind of personal vetting or a trade reference is completely wrong and needs to be stamped out.

 

Personally, I would always encourage anybody to obtain such certificates where they are required because its good business practice and common sense, however, if a DJ chose not to obtain those certificates, the worst that could happen was that they, personally, become liable for the cost of any damage or injury caused through their own negligence, however whilst it may suck to be them, their actions would be unlikely to cause me any loss of business or financially impact on me.

 

However if that same person goes on to slag off a client on a public forum, along the lines of referring to her as 'That Fat Annoying Cow' then it crosses a line and it becomes personal, and members of the public witness 'our kind' slagging off clients routinely and 'for fun', and so decide that they probably will be better off providing the music themselves, and hiring "WEDDING JUKEBOX HIRE" for their reception, and that DOES have potential to impact on me (!), so don't be surprised that I will take exception to it and draw attention to it, more so if / when its posted by somebody who is a member of an association and according to the text on their own website, supposedly is far more 'professional' than the rest through the fact he/she is a member of an Association and perhaps also has a Pro-Dub.

 

More fool me for mentioning casually mentioning NADJ as part of that and not expecting the usual backlash

 

Not sure where I was creating a backlash towards any one Association, I merely picked up on a point that you made and clearly mentioned that it was a GOOD THING that 'Associations' were actively policing the abuse by certain venues and stated that if any of them were going to draw attention to themselves then it would be prudent if they policed the actions of their own members to the same extent and with the same level of interest. I'd hate for the venues to pick up on the fact that the home of the entitles criticising them was less than perfect itself in practicing what they preached and so turn the tables, I'm sure that you would agree that this would be highly embarrassing and would not return its members any favours.

 

I'm not sure as to why this would be construed negative advice, common sense surely (?) in that if you are about to take somebody else to task, that your own policies and those integrities of your own members were watertight?

 

I'm not expecting any standards which aren't levied and policed in professional associations in other trades, I've previously linked on another thread to two such entities (one of them the Trading Standards) and could probably find you more! I also actively linked to their codes of conducts and the standards of business expected from their members. Yet, whenever I mention DJ Associations introducing a small fraction of those professional standards practiced by the MAJORITY of other professional associations, here on the forum, the response which comes back is like I have posted something written in Klingon and not of this world.

In reality, what I am doing is posting the general good business practices expected of other business owners, but of which seems alien to the DJ fraternity. :yes:

 

I'm sure that if you were to lodge a complaint to these " Associations" regarding specific members behaviour as opposed to posting it on a publicly viewable forum, then they might investigate it.

 

Since key / committee members of these associations are, I believe, also active members in such places where the points I mentioned occur, (and, I'm informed, are also moderators in some cases), then I'm sure that they are well aware of each individual situation as they arise and so it should be noted and dealt with internally already. When people engage in openly slagging off their clients / colleagues in an unprofessional manner to the point of making / trading personal insults across the internet with 'Member of xxxxxxxx' clearly and boldly promoted in their signature, then its hardly difficult to identify who they are, and shouldn't be difficult to deal with it.

I've seen enough stats to know, without any shred of doubt, that clients DO visit and read forums in ever increasing numbers and in that respect, they probably read signatures too and are interested in what professional capacity that person is making those comments, and if even one client got the wrong idea, it would be one too many.

 

Sadly it seems that I'm the only one to see the obvious connection and to uphold the policy that professionalism shouldn't end at the keyboard, certainly it should be constantly applied to the activities where engaging in ones own business activities or being an ambassador for the association you are so proud to be promoting.

 

Most employers would call an errant employee to task or even dispense of their services for gross misconduct if they acted in any manner that let the company name down or bring it into question, or acted unprofessionally or rudely when referring to or dealing with a client in the public domain.

Can anybody please provide me with a detailed, well thought out reason as to why the complete opposite is deemed acceptable or the 'norm' in our industry and nothing is done to address it? Are we Royalty or something? Oh no, we are DJ's aren't we, and that's a "get out of jail free card" in some peoples eyes.

 

I'm sure that very few of us would employ an electrician, builder, carpet fitter etc, and invite them back into our home, if we read of them verbally abusing us, or making derogatory comments about our OH's appearance or personality on a public forum, to the jeers and amusement of other like minded individuals. After all, we'd know exactly who they are, because they nearly always have their company names in their signature and profile!

 

I guarantee that such behaviour is not considered a marketing opportunity and where it is allowed to happen and is silently encouraged by the apathy of others, affects everybody's ability to remain in business and to fill their diaries, not just mine.

 

It's far easier to earn a living and earn the respect and business of a client in an industry with an already positive public perception and a glowing reputation, than it is to build a business in an industry considered stagnant and unprofessional and where the public actions of a few reflect badly on the majority. If you believe any differently, then the best of luck with that!

[robbiedj 0]

Dan, I fully agree with you about members of our profession who tend to misrepresent themselves. An association of which I am a member recently had a complaint from a customer, which was investigated and dealt with immediately. However, saying this, two wrongs do not make a right!

 

I also agree with your opinion of venues experience with various DJs and I think it is a good thing that they should and can recommend a reliable service for their customers. But this should not be forced upon the customers with a penalty clause should they want their own DJ and music.

 

Having actually spoken to Trading Standards and made approaches to the relevent Ministry, they conclude that this is almost certainly restrictive practice. They have requested that I give them as many examples as possible so that they can investigate for themselves.

 

To this end, if anybody has had dealings with venues doing this, please forward details to me via e-mail, especially if it is on the venue's website. No names will be passed on to the offices.

 

I am persuing this as an individual with the backing of two DJ associations and the MU (who also find live bands/singers suffer in the same way with customers having to pay extra) as we all agree that we do not want any back-lash to members of any association in the industry.