 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
It's been announced that the Arts Council of England is to lose £100m of it's annual budget.
Watching the news just now, an Arts 'company' was featured who has lost it's entire £400k budget and must now close it's doors.
My view is this: If an Arts 'company' wants to jump around a stage in leotards for the sheer hell of it then surely it should be run as a business, and if it can't survive as a business then it's a business nobody wants to go and see.
£400k/£30-a-ticket = 256 tickets per week.
Unless you have prime location in Leicester Square or some such like it's a tad unrealistic to aspire to achieve those kinds of ticket sales so why should the taxpayer fork out for people who are basically pursuing a hobby?
The Arts are a neccesity of life sure, but not if it means other essential services suffer as a result in times of hardship. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
personally i think that you cant judge art on commercial scales like money. What appears as a hobby to you is someone elses professional life, of course during times of hardship budgets will be cut, but life would be even more miserable without art and music, and on an economic level is the uks second biggest export investment is really important x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
