Thread: A New Perspective on Undercutting?

There was a very interesting thread on a photography forum about how wedding photographers are faring during the recession. As many of us know, photographers are faced with a lot of the same challenges - unqualified amateurs calling themselves pro's, undercutting, price-shopping clients. It was kind of like reading a typical Bhuz rant in a parallel universe ,r:;

I found one response very interesting, though. Context Clue: "GWC" = Guy With Camera = Photography's equivalent to our Six-Week Wonders:

"I was talking to one of our local wedding heavyweights a few weeks ago, he targets towards the higher end of the market with packages from 4k to 8k. He's had a good year, booked 40+ weddings (garnted our local market has weathered recession better than most) and is of the opinion the GWCs are doing him a favour, in that they soak up what he called the 'horror' end of the market. He's happy that the bridezillas with champagne tastes but armed only with a beer budget and ignorance have a swarm of people willing to promise them the world, and when it all ends in tears for them it generates bad publicity for that end of the market inspiring more people to seek out quality." (Emphasis mine).

I'm not sure if I agree with that last point, as bad publicity generated by undercutters hurts ALL of us. But on all other counts, maybe this guy's onto something....wanna discuss? ..g.:

Well, it's a little different. The GP knows bad photographs when they see them. Not everyone knows bad bellydance. Additionally many restaurant/club owners are looking at their overhead and bottom line vs quality entertainment. If they can get a dancer who does a mediocre show at a lesser price and then offers "extras" like hanging around all night, multiple shows, etc... they may look at it like a better investment.

Also the nightmare gigs may not be great but some people depend on them to pay the bills. When a dancer takes one nightmare gig, there may be 3 or 4 other people looking to book a dancer for their party/event. When that dancer working the gig networks or passes out cards/flyers that's 3 or 4 more gigs that may go with the cheaper cost.

As the market declines the undercutting gets more ruthless, good and great dancers lose jobs to those who are willing to compromise. Even in high demand markets, there are issues with long time and respected dancers having issues booking shows and losing out to fresh dancers with less ability but less cost.

Not all gigs will go with a cheaper dancer, but knowing that a few dancers are charging less may encourage newer dancers to compete by having the same low price, or even worse lower.

I also think about all those episodes of "People's Court" where crap photographers get sued for bad wedding gigs, and thus are made to face the music with a monetary fine and often public shaming. I don't think that we will ever see a BDer get their bad dancing rewarded with a small claims lawsuit.

I think in his case, the GWC would help his business, but I don't feel the same holds true for us due to economies of scale and general ignorance about what constitutes a "good" dancer vs. 6ww or WWC (woman with costume).

When someone hires a photographer, they have physical evidence afterwards of the quality of the shots, etc while in most cases, there's not much to record a performance for comparison. In addition, a photographer is expected in a wedding and so there are websites and countless threads on wedding boards dedicated to selecting a photographer, distinguising quality, etc. We don't have that as dancers because we are not mainstream - even DJs get a bit more press than we do and they still deal with the "i'll just play my ipod instead" thing all the time. There's no application to set up a website or buy a Bella/Pharaonix/Sim/Sahar and get a photoshoot done either, so even marketing and web presence doesn't guarantee professionalism and if someone has a bad experience, they just don't hire another dancer again and neither does anyone else at the party/event unless they somehow see enough quality dancers to change their mind from that one event.

It's all an interesting and unusual springboard for conversation, even though I can agree and disagree with the concept at large.

Of course, crappy photography is all in the eye of the beholder, just as bad dancing is also open to interpretation. But I often get sucked into deep photography conversations by proxy, since all of my family, a lot of my friends, and my boyfriend are avid photographers. And one of their biggest complaints is that the general public has a gross misunderstanding of what goes into a beautiful photo. Apparently, many people discount the value of impeccable lighting, composition, framing, cropping and editing, and go straight to how many pictures a photographer can churn out for the lowest cost. Photography's equivalent to our dubious dancers is the "GWC" who shows up, presses the button and gives the client a disc of 1,000 photos for $400. It's out there, and maybe JShane can chime in on this.

And I guess the inconvenience of nightmare gigs might matter more to those of us who support ourselves through another job. That being said, however, there is sort of a weird comfort to be found in knowing that the market sorts itself out. When I get calls from clients who exhibit micromanaging, haggling or other behaviors that make me uneasy, I almost always feel relieved if another dancer gets the gig. Then again, a full-time dancer would probably react differently - and I want to hear some responses from this camp!

And Tanya, funny that you mention it. I think I remember a thread about a hula troupe appearing on Judge Judy because their client wasn't pleased with their show! I'm gonna have to dig that up...

I like the professional photographer's attitude. His work is tangible & the portfolio is easily transported to different locations for the customers perusal. Based on the obvious body of work they can decide if he is worth financing.

With dancers it is a little more difficult to assess. Portfolios should be a requirement for potential employment. What does the dancer look like in costume? What is the quality of the costume? A small percentage of potential employers ask for one.

Then there is the dance~ Unless the customer is educated in the genre of dance they seek how can they differentiate between good and otherwise? There have been many threads concerning the lack of educated customers and sufficiently talented dancers.

Then there is the auditions process or not~ If they are wise an audition will be requested. But how many dancers want to perform sans pay? How many people hiring for Uncle Bob's party know there are dancers who can talk the language but can't dance & the airport/Halloween costume isn't the standard?

There are so many variables and no resolution. The only element we can control is our own standards & ethics. The rest is anyone's guess.

Originally Posted by SatinWorship19

And Tanya, funny that you mention it. I think I remember a thread about a hula troupe appearing on Judge Judy because their client wasn't pleased with their show! I'm gonna have to dig that up...

Not to thread jack, it would make me so happy if you could find this!

Furthermore, I also think there's some serious merit in having "qualified" clients. Our art and our business, as well as our own well-being, are enhanced when we consistently do business with people who appreciate our sevices, treat us with respect, pay us well and refer us to others.

I think that's the larger point that this photographer was getting at, beyond the simple perk of dodging Gigs From Hell!

Originally Posted by SuzanneAzhaar

Then there is the auditions process or not~ If they are wise an audition will be requested. But how many dancers want to perform sans pay? How many people hiring for Uncle Bob's party know there are dancers who can talk the language but can't dance & the airport/Halloween costume isn't the standard?

There are so many variables and no resolution. The only element we can control is our own standards & ethics. The rest is anyone's guess.

Not to mention, a lot of clients for one-off gigs simply don't want to be inconvenienced with holding auditions. Typically, a client will ask me to e-mail them video footage if they're interested in seeing how I dance. But honestly, most people will hire me without even asking to see video. I've never had to audition.

For better and for worse, I think the rest depends on all sorts of weird intangibles that have nothing to do with dance. Some people will hire the first person who picks up the phone, or the nicest person they've spoken with. Some might hire based on a specific look. Some people are suckers for nice websites. It's all totally irresolute, which I guess means that being our personal best is all we can do. ,r:;

Originally Posted by _Tanya_

Not to thread jack, it would make me so happy if you could find this!

Your wish is my command! This thread actually contains some useful legal insight, should we ever find ourselves in small claims court because Joe & Jane Blow didn't like our costume:

http://www.bhuz.com/forum/rest-belly...e-parties.html

I'm going to agree with the others. There is certainly room for personal taste in what constitutes "quality", but the overall problem on our end is that the vast majority of the GP wouldn't know good Middle Eastern dance if it hit them over the head with a large, heavy assaya. I'm sure photographers blanch at the cheesy and crazy requests they get from customers, just like we roll our eyes at some of the things dancers are asked to do, but you don't have to be an expert to look at a blurry photo where the subject is half out of the frame to realize the photographer probably wasn't very good. OTOH, the media has cultivated such a consistently distorted image of what we do that unless the dancer showed up to a gig drunk, wearing sweatpants and a lingerie bra, and dancing to Alvin and the Chipmunks, lots of people wouldn't even realize something was wrong. Once you step outside of the communities of people with Middle Eastern heritage and people who've traveled to places where you can see real dancing, the rest of the US are getting their ideas of what a dancer looks like from Mr. Big's Mesopotamian lap dance and the cartoon intro to "I Dream of Jeannie." There is just no conscious understanding of what we're supposed to be doing when we perform, beyond wearing a bedlah.

Per MaryRaks and "Bella/Pharaonix/Sim/Sahar…"
Speaking of things that give a distorted picture of good dancing…The GP is not aware of couture costumes. If you showed up in a very minimalist, modern costume, people would scratch their heads and ask why you weren't in the right outfit. In the GP's mind, belly dance fashion is suspended in the amber of old sitcoms. People who've never seen a "real" dancer before still expect you to dress like you're working a North Beach nightclub in 1968.

Overvaluing costumes is a pet peeve of mine. Good dancing comes from the dancer, not the outfit. Yes, you need to have a costume that shows off your movements well, but the fact that it's expensive does not guarantee anything. Long gone are the days where only the dancers who were committed enough to travel to Cairo or Istanbul would have the best costumes, and I wish I had a dollar for every dancer in an expensive costume who couldn't perform well enough to be worthy of it. Nothing is stopping a bad dancer from buying high-end costumes online, and these aren't magic outfits. If you can't dance, putting on a Bella isn't going to fix that, and if the costume doesn't fit you properly, then it doesn't matter how well you dance or how much it costs--you're going to look like an amateur in it. Of course, thanks to the ignorance of the GP, you can coast pretty far on just impressing them with a sparkly outfit, but if our mission is to get a realistic, quality presentation of the art into the public consciousness, then "amateur" isn't good enough.

BTW, photography is a bigger business. They can support a lot more crud before it drags down the whole industry.

Originally Posted by _Tanya_

Well, it's a little different. The GP knows bad photographs when they see them.

Not agreeing with this. I've seen photographs by allegedly well-reputed photographers which fall very short of my expectations, yet folks think the photos are wonderful. The world is full of crappy photographs. And full of wonderful photographs. This situation underscores the idea that not all the GP necessarily knows what they're looking at.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

BTW, photography is a bigger business. They can support a lot more crud before it drags down the whole industry.

Agreeing with this.

I don't believe anymore in this concept of "undercutting." There is a range of acceptable (and unacceptable) pay for any, ANY domain of work. We forget that much of the onous is on the suspecting (or unsuspecting) public. Everyone, do your research (whether you're the artist or the client), ask the right questions, represent yourself properly, work from a base of integrity. Sure, the effects of "undercutting" sucks but it's prevalent everywhere. I would concentrate on our tasks.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

There is just no conscious understanding of what we're supposed to be doing when we perform, beyond wearing a bedlah.

All I can offer here is a sympathetic eyeball roll and a dramatic, emo sighhhhhhhhhhh....

Per MaryRaks and "Bella/Pharaonix/Sim/Sahar…"
Speaking of things that give a distorted picture of good dancing…The GP is not aware of couture costumes. If you showed up in a very minimalist, modern costume, people would scratch their heads and ask why you weren't in the right outfit. In the GP's mind, belly dance fashion is suspended in the amber of old sitcoms. People who've never seen a "real" dancer before still expect you to dress like you're working a North Beach nightclub in 1968.

This is very, very true. Interestingly, I think the pendulum has swung back in the direction of "classic" looks. Maybe because dancers have less discretionary income to spend on costumes that only appeal to such a small segment of their clientele? Maybe because familiar comforts are stylish in lean times? Of course, those who liked high-end couture stuff are probably getting classic costumes designed by Bella rather than shopping vintage - but that's a different tangent. I think costumes still matter to a lot of dancers, even though the styling has changed.

BTW, photography is a bigger business. They can support a lot more crud before it drags down the whole industry.

Yeah, this should be taken into consideration. Photography doesn't really have any pre-existing stereotypes or weird gendered/ethnocentric/Orientalist cultural baggage. Foucault wouldn't have a bone to pick with how our culture perceives wedding photography, where he might reference a hegemonious political regime or two when viewing the "Sultan act" of a kitschy bellygram!

Originally Posted by Azhia

I don't believe anymore in this concept of "undercutting." There is a range of acceptable (and unacceptable) pay for any, ANY domain of work. We forget that much of the onous is on the suspecting (or unsuspecting) public. Everyone, do your research (whether you're the artist or the client), ask the right questions, represent yourself properly, work from a base of integrity. Sure, the effects of "undercutting" sucks but it's prevalent everywhere. I would concentrate on our tasks.

I think in a very general sense, we have to understand the phenomenon at large in order to move forward. It's all part of having a big picture grasp on the entire landscape of your regional market, and where exactly you fit in.

Acknowledging/understanding is a different entity from bitching/blaming/overanalyzing, and I'm trying to change my mindset from the latter to the former.

This is why I found this photographer's post so compelling. Instead of bashing undercutters, he acknowledges that it's a free market out there and both vendors and clients will do as they please. That being said, "undercutting" may never go away for good. So maybe to this guy's point, it does help to think of the phenomenon as a distribution of clientele. Generally speaking, if you're a quality dancer, you'll attract quality clients. If you're a dollar-a-holler dancer, you'll attract clients with different values.

Originally Posted by SatinWorship19

When I get calls from clients who exhibit micromanaging, haggling or other behaviors that make me uneasy, I almost always feel relieved if another dancer gets the gig. Then again, a full-time dancer would probably react differently - and I want to hear some responses from this camp!

Considering I was the one who coined the term "PITA fee" waaaay back on tribe, I'd say I'm happy when cheap micromanaging clients go elsewhere. lol. Seriously, why would full timers who see this as a profession be different?
I think people who don't know better will undercut. This can be full timer or newbie.
I think people who are desperate will undercut. This can be full timer desperate for money or newbie desperate for applause. Makes no difference.

Originally Posted by SatinWorship19

Not to mention, a lot of clients for one-off gigs simply don't want to be inconvenienced with holding auditions.

We don't CHARGE enough to warrant OUR time for an audition for a one time event.

Originally Posted by Azhia

I don't believe anymore in this concept of "undercutting." There is a range of acceptable (and unacceptable) pay for any, ANY domain of work. We forget that much of the onous is on the suspecting (or unsuspecting) public. Everyone, do your research (whether you're the artist or the client), ask the right questions, represent yourself properly, work from a base of integrity. Sure, the effects of "undercutting" sucks but it's prevalent everywhere. I would concentrate on our tasks.

One of our tasks as professionals is to promote our art and professionalism in our art, or that's how I see it.
A venue where I've been for a year, just suffered the consequences of undercutting- lowered everyone's pay from the established dancer to the subs... all because one person who has been in the business a while and should know better took lower pay when she didn't even HAVE to. The night was left open from another dancer leaving and she could have asked the same rate. It's such a pity.
One dancer's choices effect other dancer's income directly at times. It's only by sticking together and supporting each other that we can counter the acts of the ignorant few.
I HAVE gotten a raise at a regular venue when the owner tried someone else much cheaper. So, I see what the OP photographer was talking about.
... and while knowing "good/bad photography" is NOT generally the forte of the general public, even a novice will notice "hey, no cake picture" or "why are the tops of their heads cut off". There is sometimes REAL obvious and tangible "this guy with camera knows nothing" for a client. With a belly dancer, most GP has less experience and therefore less to compare quality.

If a new to belly dance client has one really bad experience with a dancer, they'll never want to repeat the experience. That is not doing us any favors.

Originally Posted by SamiraShuruk

I think people who are desperate will undercut. This can be full timer desperate for money or newbie desperate for applause. Makes no difference.

Yeah, I hate to say it, but that sounds right. Sadly, I think more dancers are easing up their standards in order to make the ends meet today. Some of us are traveling greater distances to gigs, taking last-minute engagements, doing multiple bookings in one night, or other things that we might have previously considered inconvenient. One of my friends, who is highly established, has been doing a lot of gigs for $50 less than her usual rate because she claims she needs the money ,f:: If every dancer in a community follows this logic, then what happens when the economy gets better?

We don't CHARGE enough to warrant OUR time for an audition for a one time event.

This, too. This is another tangent. I've never understood why we charge so much less per show than most other variety entertainers who perform at the same types of events. Apparently, I feel cynical lately ,r:;

Originally Posted by SatinWorship19

Interestingly, I think the pendulum has swung back in the direction of "classic" looks. Maybe because dancers have less discretionary income to spend on costumes that only appeal to such a small segment of their clientele? Maybe because familiar comforts are stylish in lean times?

Not to get too OT, but it may just be that the fashion industry is built on the idea that things cycle in and out of style. Now that most working pros have moved away from the traditional look of the bra and belt with a full skirt, it'll be time to bring it back. You know if you wait long enough, those five-pounds-of-beads, crazy fringe monsters are going to come back in style...

I think costumes still matter to a lot of dancers, even though the styling has changed.

Costumes are necessary for a polished, professional appearance, and looking the part does matter. I just get frustrated when people use the quality of the wardrobe as a measure of the quality of the dancer. The better you are, the more likely you are to have nicer costumes, but the converse isn't always true.

Originally Posted by SamiraShuruk

With a belly dancer, most GP has less experience and therefore less to compare quality.

I think there's also a wider range of valid, stylistic choices in what we do, as compared to photography. The average man on the street can tell the difference between the saccharine, lowbrow photography of a dollar-store calendar of kittens, and the black-and-white art photography by Robert Mapplethorpe (graphic eroticism aside), but it's still clear that both are the same basic idea of framing a subject through a camera lens to create a memorable image. To someone who didn't know anything about belly dance, how would you reconcile Dina and Rachel Brice and Didem (each outstanding examples of their unique styles) with the cliche of the harem girl in the coin costume and full chiffon skirt? We not only have to appeal to an individual's taste and expectations within a particular style, but also to address the higher level of which style a customer wants. There's a lot under our umbrella.

[quote=Tourbeau;570552]Not to get too OT, but it may just be that the fashion industry is built on the idea that things cycle in and out of style. Now that most working pros have moved away from the traditional look of the bra and belt with a full skirt, it'll be time to bring it back. You know if you wait long enough, those five-pounds-of-beads, crazy fringe monsters are going to come back in style...

Oh, methinks they already have. There's been some serious fanfare over vintage Abla fringemonsters over on the Swap Meet! I was just thinking aloud about this over on Facebook the other day....funny how we've gone from one costuming extreme to the other, seemingly overnight. I took way too many fashion history classes in college. When fashion undergoes a radical shift, it's almost always prompted by some equally dramatic change in sociopolitical values. Been having too much fun analyzing this trend ,r:; (end threadjack)

To someone who didn't know anything about belly dance, how would you reconcile Dina and Rachel Brice and Didem (each outstanding examples of their unique styles) with the cliche of the harem girl in the coin costume and full chiffon skirt? We not only have to appeal to an individual's taste and expectations within a particular style, but also to address the higher level of which style a customer wants. There's a lot under our umbrella.

I've been thinking about this one, as well. A dancer like Didem is fashionably exotic, with her modernized Turkish dancing and wardrobe. I have no doubts that she would still communicate "belly dance" loud and clear to most of the general public. (Though I'm sure some would ask why she didn't feed grapes to the host of the show and get him up to practice hip shimmies....forgive me, I'm drawing a blank on his name).

I think it's possible to maintain the "belly dancer aura" without necessarily cheesing it up or resorting to harem cliches. Then again, there will always be a market for kitsch. It's up to the individual dancer to determine whether her presentation will skew more modern or more retro. For personal reasons, I try to avoid or modify certain standard commonplaces of the 'gram scene....but I do this knowing full well that I may lose gigs to a dancer who focuses more on the novelty aspect.

Originally Posted by SatinWorship19

I've been thinking about this one, as well. A dancer like Didem is fashionably exotic, with her modernized Turkish dancing and wardrobe. I have no doubts that she would still communicate "belly dance" loud and clear to most of the general public.

I think you're right that of the three of them, Didem would translate the best. The old AmCab style has a lot of elements of Turkish in it, and while I personally find her to be somewhat flail-y at times, I could turn on SYTYCD and see someone doing a comparably high-energy musical interpretation in the name of modern dance, so the uninitiated probably would find her style more familiar.

I think it's possible to maintain the "belly dancer aura" without necessarily cheesing it up or resorting to harem cliches. Then again, there will always be a market for kitsch. It's up to the individual dancer to determine whether her presentation will skew more modern or more retro. For personal reasons, I try to avoid or modify certain standard commonplaces of the 'gram scene....but I do this knowing full well that I may lose gigs to a dancer who focuses more on the novelty aspect.

I'm not saying we should go that route--more that the harem kitsch is what the GP expects and we always need to take their current state of mind into account when we set about to show them otherwise. The idea of balancing what the customer wants with what we want to give them came up in the prop thread. There's an art to compromising in such a way that you don't go against your own principles, and sometimes you do need to walk away and not give in, even if it means losing the job to someone else.

So what to do with those low-end, icky gigs? The photographer in the first post thinks the dancers in the quality camp should leave them to the inferior dancers. On one level, he's right. Crummy customers deserve crummy performers. OTOH, we don't have the luxury that photographers do. The GP has an understanding that some photographers are more "artist" than others, and the good ones demand higher fees. People don't always realize that about us, which means we need to treat every time we perform as a public relations opportunity. EVERY gig to us is an outreach and a crucial step in building the brand in the public eye. When we let an unqualified dancer in front of the public, it tarnishes all of our reputations. At best, it gives a whole roomful of people the idea that belly dancers are just novelty entertainers with few legitimate skills or qualifications, and at worst, it convinces each of them that they don't ever want to make the mistake of hiring a belly dancer again. I'm almost tempted to say that the bad gigs need a qualified dancer more than the good ones, if for no other reason than they're the customers who need educating the most (although heaven knows how you'd ever get them to pay a decent price for the gig, and you can lead a horse to water...).

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

The GP has an understanding that some photographers are more "artist" than others, and the good ones demand higher fees. People don't always realize that about us, which means we need to treat every time we perform as a public relations opportunity. EVERY gig to us is an outreach and a crucial step in building the brand in the public eye. When we let an unqualified dancer in front of the public, it tarnishes all of our reputations. At best, it gives a whole roomful of people the idea that belly dancers are just novelty entertainers with few legitimate skills or qualifications, and at worst, it convinces each of them that they don't ever want to make the mistake of hiring a belly dancer again.

<bolded emphasis mine>

Although my point isn't specific to pro solo gigs or undercutting per se, Tourbeau's thoughts reflect exactly on why it is of supreme importance that teachers uncompromisingly refrain from putting anything less than very well prepared upper-intermediate students on display at events where the GP is present (community events, fairs, etc).

We teachers cannot be exhibiting lower levels of performances at anything other than recitals and haflas! If students want to dance "in public," then those students need to work hard enough and possess the skills to be worthy of the honor!

*pulls hair from head* and

Ummmm . . . .w.: . . . sorry about that . . .



Deborah

Great topic!

Undercutting around here would be a very bad thing for us dancers. I'm in a city where most people are not familiar with belly dance. If people see unprofessional belly dancing or belly dance inspired stripping, they're apt to label all of us that way around here (though that seems to be the case anyway as this area is very very conservative).

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

I think there's also a wider range of valid, stylistic choices in what we do, as compared to photography....There's a lot under our umbrella.

Ahhh, yes, agreed. ..g.:

Back to the original premise of the topic... I think the difference between the GWC "photographer" and WWC (love that!) is that the object of the shoddy work is the customer themselves in the case of photographs! It's a lot easier to shrug and walk away from a mediocre dance performance than it is to have the photos of your "big day" forever be mediocre.

So - no, I don't think that undercutters are doing us any favors.

Mahin

The difference between photography and bellydance is that while few people would go without photos at their wedding, there are many alternatives to a dancer. You can get other entertainment.

So if you saw your sister's wedding photos from GWC be bad, you get a pro. If you saw Suzy Nippletassles embarras your brother at his wedding, you may consider a salsa band instead. ME weddings would be an exception perhaps.

Also, not everyone knows what a good costume and good dance is. They may see that a 6ww in a ligerie bra with a bit of bling glued on it is not the real thing. But can they tell the difference between an intermediate in a Nile Flower and a great dancer in a Sahar?

Originally Posted by MahinS

Back to the original premise of the topic... I think the difference between the GWC "photographer" and WWC (love that!) is that the object of the shoddy work is the customer themselves in the case of photographs! It's a lot easier to shrug and walk away from a mediocre dance performance than it is to have the photos of your "big day" forever be mediocre.

Mahin

Excellent insight, Mahin.

Deborah

Originally Posted by Bellissima

The difference between photography and bellydance is that while few people would go without photos at their wedding, there are many alternatives to a dancer. You can get other entertainment.

So if you saw your sister's wedding photos from GWC be bad, you get a pro. If you saw Suzy Nippletassles embarras your brother at his wedding, you may consider a salsa band instead.

Another excellent insight.

Deborah

Sorry I forgot about my own thread ,r:;

All excellent points, though.

I'm surprised nobody's really dug deeper into the concept of qualified vs. unqualified clients, because I think consumer behaviors are just as worthy of examination as dancer behaviors. (Though one might argue that one behavior facilitates/enables the other, and/or vice versa).

Indulge me in a navel-gazing moment - but which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Do undercutters and unqualified pro's breed more obnoxious client behaviors? Or do ignorant clients create and sustain the market for six-week wonders? If all belly dancers priced themselves fairly and presented a classy offering onstage and in their media appearances, then would we effectively "starve" the clients who expect a troupe of 12 hula dancing, tassel twirling belly dancers for $150? If clients got a clue and knew good belly dancing from bad, would dancers say "Who am I fooling?" and feel less compelled to go pro after 2 classes?

I do think stupid dancers and stupid clients pretty much support each other in tandem....which all brings us back to Tourbeau and CasbahDance's points about PR.

Well, if most clients would be happy with a mediocre dancer, you could say they do not deserve more. However, if in a town, there are 50 qualified clients asking for gigs, 500 stupid clients, 3 great professional dancers and 10 unqualified girls with costumes, the pros still rely on some of the stupid clients to get bread on the table. If most are uneducated about what is good dance, but nice, reliable and willing to pay a decent rate, the pros would hurt to lose them. But if they see a website of a girl with a nice looking costume, who happens to be young and pretty, charging 100$ instead of 200$, they can be swayed to hire her instead. If that girl is not actively bad or inapprropriate, but just a dancer who took lessons for two years but does not invest in workshops, nicer costumes than the dumb customer requires, private lessons, they may well be satisfied. She may not get any of the qualified clients, but does that matter if she gets 300 of the stupid ones?
If one of the pros can get 40 of the educted clients and 100 of the stupid ones, she is still earning less and having more costs.

I do think that as it becomes more common to post a youtube ish video on the website, the worst dancers will be weeded out. Also, if the best dancers made sure they marketed themselves well, and came up on the first page of a google search, that would help a lot.

I do think marketing is one of the most powerful tools for leveling the playing field. One can never underestimate the power of an undercutting dancer with a strong internet presence

It is true that a dancer who books more gigs at a lower cost may initially earn more than those of us who gig less frequently and command a higher rate. But if the quality is lacking, it's doubtful that many of those gigs will pan out as referrals or repeat business. Not to mention, the whole PR thing. If this dancer turns lots of people off to Middle Eastern dance, then the rest of us theoretically suffer the consequences. The last thing on earth I'd like to see is for a bunch of general public customers to leave a party saying, "Wow, that belly dancer's routine looked so easy even Grandma could do it!"

Then, there are the enlightened clients who appreciate the artistry and aesthetics of our craft. These people have so much power to act as positive ambassadors for the dance and sustain the market for high-paying, respectable gigs. Again, it takes a certain level of marketing savvy to reach this audience and anticipate their needs. But they're out there, and oddly, I've noticed that there's a lot less competition over better-paying gigs than there is over crap gigs.

This is becoming such a complex thread, which is wonderful! Now, I'm thinking about conversion. I wonder if it's within in our power to help shape the consumer landscape. For those who take a proactive approach, how do you educate the customer?

I have two thoughts on this, one is that there's tons more weddings hiring photogs than parties hiring bellydancers... so the income opportunities are not similar at all. But that's not what gets me about this thread.

First lets' set aside the possibility that we're doing drunken frat party gigs - So, "stupid audiences"? This is sloppy & disrespectful.

For one thing, in any audience you're gonna have both "stupid" as you say, and "intelligent" people. That is, those who you think appreciate your art & those who don't. This reminds me of something Jadaya said (you all may not know her, she was from the 70's/80's). She said that from touring so much she developed an attitude of looking at her audiences as "ticky tacky people in ticky tacky houses" or something to that effect; but came to realize she was missing the point of performing. I don't get looking down your noses at audiences, I really don't. If you find yourself feeling like that you need to check yourself & get an attitude adjustment.

Anytime you step in front of an audience (& I've seen all kinds believe me) you should appreciate being there.