Recommendations to club night promoters for smarter use of flyers

This post is based upon findings from the 2010 Leeds Clubber Survey, which had a particular focus upon attitudes towards, and usage of nightclub and club night flyers in Leeds by both promoters and clubbers alike. Along with this a literature review was carried out into best practice flyer design and distribution techniques, the culmination of both have contributed to the recommendations made below.


Club night promoters are largely aware that flyers are not as effective a promotional method as what word of mouth recommendation and social media are (although they don't always want to admit this). Word of mouth and social media come at very little cost, other than ensuring that the people who have visited club nights have had the most enjoyable of times. 

Promoters should capitalise on the fact that the majority of their customers are regular repeat visitors, by continuing to entice them back.  Whether it is the musical repertoire of a particular night, the quality of the venue, the price of drinks or the entry charge, whatever feature or combination of features that a particular club night has that is attractive to its customers should be maintained, and every now and again improved upon to reward those loyal repeat customers who keep coming back.  As many clubbers already know which club nights they are visiting, it is unnecessary to give them another flyer.

With that said, there is still a place for flyers, but their use could be smarter and certainly more efficient.  For mainstream club nights that attract a wider audience of clubbers and particularly student clubbers, on street flyer distribution will never be as efficient as it could be as long as a mass distribution to anyone and everyone is adopted.  Therefore the following recommendations are made:

·     target your existing customers with flyers as they leave the premises (exit flyering), only reward them with something better than a ‘paper’ flyer.  Re-usable flyers made of something that is more longer lasting than paper could further encourage repeat visitation.  For example a plastic credit card sized flyer that upon presentation gave the bearer something that other clubbers did not get in terms of reduced entry or a special offer could be an attractive proposition to customers.  Such a flyer should include clear information about what it entitles the bearer to, as well as terms and conditions;

·     encourage earlier nightclub attendance by providing flyers with special offers for those who arrive earlier;

·     if flyers made of paper and card are to be used, then use them more efficiently by making them last for a prolonged period of time, and making their presentation upon arrival at a club entitle the bearer to a special offer or discount that non-flyer bearers are not entitled to.  Flyers could be collected by door staff, and then exit flyered back to customers as they leave;

·     flyer content needs to adhere closely to what is suggested in this post, and this needs to be more consistently applied by promoters to all of their flyers;

·     capitalise upon the fact that clubbing is a social activity, and allow just one flyer to entitle a group of clubbers to a discount;

·     do not employ people to distribute flyers that are not friendly and chatty, consider the quality of the flyer transaction rather than the quantity of flyers that are given.  Flyers taken by clubbers for the ‘wrong’ reasons (often pity and guilt) are realistically of very little worth;

·     other than special offers consider ways by which flyers might contribute to the atmosphere of a club night, by giving them a purpose for a ‘fun’ activity that takes place during the club night, this might encourage clubbers to keep hold of them and not throw them away;

·     and be conscious of an ageing population, which will mean an increase in older clubbers. Older clubbers are less likely to pick up flyers so promoters should begin to consider alternative ways to promote to them.

Flyers for club nights that feature ‘niche’ and specialist music genres certainly have a place, particularly as their audiences are interested in reading more about them.  Flyers for these type of club nights that are distributed by friendly people who are passionate about the music are likely to have a greater efficiency than flyers that are left static to be collected or are distributed by people who do not represent the ‘scene’.  It is therefore a recommendation that flyers for ‘niche’ and specialist music nights are distributed by fans of the music, in the places that are frequented by their target market, and that conversation forms part of the flyer transaction.

All letterbox flyering should immediately cease, it fuels ill feeling amongst clubbers to flyers, promoters and their club nights.  It is potentially damaging, and risks souring the relationship between clubber and promoter.  The only possible exception to this rule is if flyers are used in a friendly ‘door-knocking’ manner and given by hand along with conversation.  This is what some specialist dub-step promoters do in halls of residence, knock on a door, ask the occupants if they are fans of dub-step music, if they are not, they apologise for bothering them and move on.  If they are fans, they give them a flyer into their hands and tell them about the club night.  For this to be carried out effectively it needs to be done by people who are genuine fans of the music.

Club night promoters need to acknowledge that clubbers are overall an environmentally aware group, and that needless waste created by flyers enforces a negative perception of the promoter and club night.  In addition to what has already been stated above about reusable flyers, the following initiatives should be considered:

·     promoters should be seen to be more active in picking up discarded flyers;

·     have clearly marked ‘flyer bins’ along the street where distributors are so that those who do not want to keep flyers dispose of them in a way that allows them to be used again;

·     make greater use of posters and lesser use of paper flyers;

·     produce fewer flyers that are valid for more people, thereby encouraging group visits;

·     concentrate more on social media and online promotions.  It would be relatively simple for promoters to distribute a link to their customers that took them to a page of flyers that contained special offers that could be printed by clubbers or even saved onto mobile smart phones and shown upon entry to gain a discount.

It is a recommendation to all club night promoters to be honest with themselves about the use of flyers, do they really represent true value as a promotional medium? To really be able to gauge this, promoters should attempt to survey those entering clubs (particularly in queues) to gain a clearer understanding of the impact that flyers really have upon their customers choice of club night. Promoters should consider experimenting with club nights that are not promoted at all by flyers - and if any of you are 'brave' enough to do this, I'd be very interested to hear your results!

Results of the Leeds Clubber Survey 2010

The Leeds Clubber Survey 2010 was placed online for one month in July 2010, it was completed by 295 respondents. The survey was intended to gather information from clubbers in Leeds with relation to their clubbing habits including: their nightclub preferences; frequency of visitation; influences on their visitation to nightclubs; reactions towards club night promotional materials; and attitudes towards flyers. The survey was promoted to clubbers by several Leeds based club night promotion companies, each of whom sent a link to the online survey to their e-mail lists and social media groups.

74% of respondents indicated that they went clubbing in Leeds, therefore the target audience of Leeds clubbers was reached with this survey. The key findings of the survey are listed below, for further information, please contact Stuart Moss at the email address at the top of this page, or through Twitter @ents_leeds_met .

Respondent demographics

In terms of age, the respondents represented the age range of under 18 up to 55, with the largest single segment being the 18-23 age group at 51% of respondents.  24-29 year olds made up 19% of respondents, 30-35% year old made up 13%, 36-40 year olds made up 10%, and out of the remaining 7%, 6% were aged 41-55, and 1% were aged under 18.

With regards to student status, 46% of respondents indicated that they were a student.  With the largest single group of these being full-time university students (39%), with the remaining 7% of students being either part-time or at further education institutions.  47% of respondents indicated that they were not students, which was a higher than anticipated figure, however this is feasible considering the spread of ages of respondents.  7% of respondents indicated ‘other’ or did not respond to this question, out of the ‘other’ responses answers were mainly: ‘on a gap year’; ‘just graduated’; and ‘on a work placement’.

In terms of employment, 49% of respondents indicated that they were full-time employed, with 23% indicating that they were employed part-time, 20% of respondents indicated that they were unemployed, and the remaining 8% indicated ‘other’ or declined to answer the question.  Out of the ‘other’ responses, the predominant answers were ‘home-maker’; ‘self-employed’; and ‘work voluntarily’.  By definition ‘unemployed’ refers to people who have stated that they do not have jobs, it does not mean ‘unemployed and claiming benefits’, it is entirely feasible to assume that a proportion of those labelled unemployed may also be full-time students.

Where respondents go clubbing

74% of respondents indicated that they go clubbing in Leeds, this was followed by Manchester (18%), London and Sheffield (11.5% each), Barnsley 10%, Wakefield 9%, Birmingham 7%, Newcastle 6%, Liverpool 5%, Bradford, Huddersfield, Nottingham and Preston (3% each).  37% of respondents also indicated that they went clubbing in other UK towns and cities, and 6% stated that they went clubbing in non-UK towns and cities.  It should be noted that the majority of respondents stated that they went clubbing in more than one town / city.

Clubbing frequency

In terms of frequency of visitation, 41% of respondents indicated that they visited a nightclub at least once per week, with 8% stating that they visited a club three or more times per week.  15% of respondents indicated that they visit a club every two weeks, and 23% indicated that they visited a club every 3 - 4 weeks.  21% of respondents indicated that they visited nightclubs less than monthly. 

55% of students go clubbing every week or more, this compares with only 30% of non-students.  35% of employed people also go clubbing at least weekly, but this compares with 62% of unemployed respondents.  20% of students go clubbing once per month or less, compared with 51% of non-students.  41% of employed respondents go clubbing once per month or less, compared with only 15% of those respondents who are unemployed.

Club preferences

In terms of preferred club types visited by respondents, the most popular club type was mainstream high street clubs, which typically have an offering of commercial chart music and ‘classics’.  This was followed by niche music clubs that specialise in a particular music genre, and live music clubs and superclubs (large clubs with numerous rooms and several DJs).  Mainstream commercial music nights were slightly more popular amongst students (28%) and the 18-26 age group (27%).  The least popular types of club were gay clubs, strip clubs and supper clubs.  In terms of status i.e. students, non-students, the employed and unemployed, all categories of respondents had very similar preferences, with the only marked difference being that strip clubs were twice as popular amongst non-students, as they were to students. 

95% of respondents indicated that they tend to visit the same nightclubs.

Musically, respondents preferred nights that involved mainstream and commercial music, which involves ‘pop’ music, music in the charts and previous chart ‘classics’, this was closely followed by specialist dance music nights, which mainly includes commercial dance, house, techno, drum and base, dub step, basslines and their associated musical sub-genres.  The least popular music nights identified by clubbers were hip hop / RnB and ‘other’ which included: previously unmentioned genres of dance music; jazz; ska; northern soul; acoustic; bhangra and Asian music.

89% of respondents stated that music was either a strong influence or a very strong influence as to their choice of club night, with only 5% of respondents stating that music had little or no influence upon their choice of club night.

The reputation of club nights in the minds of clubbers is important in their decision making process with 60% stating that reputation was either a strong or very strong influence in their decision making process.  31% of respondents stated that reputation was of some influence, and 9% stated that reputation was of little or no influence in their decision to visit a particular club night. 

When clubbers go clubbing

The clear majority of clubbers tend to go clubbing on the same nights of the week with 72% stating that they visit clubs on the same night either all of the time or most of the time.  Only 9% of respondents indicated that they rarely or never went clubbing on the same night of the week.

The most popular nights for clubbing are clearly Friday and Saturday, with the least popular night being Sunday, which is followed by a steady increase through the week until the weekend.

Clubber finance

62% of respondents stated that entry charge was very important or important in their decision making process, with a further 26% of respondents stating that entry charge was of some importance, 12% of respondents considered entry charge to be not important or of no importance.  Demographically, students (71%) and the unemployed (70%) were the two single largest groups that were concerned with door entry price.  A similar pattern to this followed with the importance of drink prices within clubs, with 61% of clubbers stating that drink prices were very important or important, 27% of respondents stating that drink prices were of some importance, and 12% stating that drink prices were not important or of no importance.  71% of student clubbers stated that drink prices were either important or very important to them.

Clubbing as a social activity

98% of respondents indicated that clubbing was for them a social activity, by either going with a friend or friends to clubs, or meeting a friend or friends at clubs.  47% of respondents indicated that friends had either a lot or complete influence on their decision as to whether to visit a club or not, 45% indicated that friends played some influence on their decision making process, and 8% claimed that friends had little or no influence as to their decision to visit a club.  In terms of the influence of friends upon which night(s) of the week to go clubbing, respondents indicated in similar levels with 49% stating that friends had a lot or complete influence, 37% stated that friends had some influence, and 14% stated that friends had little or no influence as to which night(s) of the week to go clubbing.

Research by clubbers

When respondents were asked how they find out information about club nights, word of mouth was the most popular response and stated by 88% of respondents, followed by social media websites (68%), and nightclub flyers (59%).  The least popular responses were: advertisements on radio and television; by directly contacting clubs and promoters; and other, which included: through working in the nightclub industry; using Internet search engines; and through visiting online bulletin boards and discussion forums about club nights. 93% of students and 97% of the unemployed indicated that word of mouth was a major way from which they found out information on club nights.  Social media websites were similarly popular amongst all demographic categories, with only a very slight standard deviation of 6 on the overall average of 68%.  The 18 – 26 age group were the single largest demographic group to use social media websites at 76%.  There was a wider dispersal of flyer usage for finding out information about club nights, with a standard deviation of 14 on the overall average of 59%.  Students were the single largest demographic group to use flyers (72%), those aged 27 – 35 were the least likely to use flyers (40%).

From the above list of methods by which clubbers might find out information about club nights, respondents again deemed word of mouth as being the single largest influence, followed by social media and flyers.  Respondents considered text messages from club promoters, and radio and television advertisements as being the least influential methods in their choice of club night.

With regards to how active respondents are in terms of searching for information about club nights, 26% of respondents always or regularly search for information about club nights, 35% stated that they sometimes look for information about club nights, with 38% stating that they rarely or never look for information about club nights.  Further analysis of this reveals that student clubbers (21%) are less likely to always or regularly search for information about club nights than non-student clubbers (30%), there is less difference between the employed (26%) and the unemployed (23%), but larger differences are apparent when looking at age.  As the age of respondents increases, there is a steady increase in the number of those who always or regularly search for information about club nights, from those aged 18-26 (23%) to those aged 46-55 (46%).  Further analysis of age and always and regularly searching for information reveals a correlation of 0.97, which is a very strong positive correlation demonstrating that as respondents age their propensity to search for information increases.  This is also enforced by looking at the ages of respondents who rarely or never look for information about club nights, here where age increases there is a slight increase before a decrease in the percentage of respondents who look for information about club nights, with a moderate negative correlation of -0.78.

Clubbers and flyers

Clubbers were asked how often that they themselves chose to pick up and collect flyers, there was quite an even spread of responses given, 32% of respondents indicated that they picked up flyers at least weekly, 28% of respondents picked up flyers between weekly and monthly, 23% of respondents picked up flyers less than once per month and 17% stated that they never picked up flyers.

Further demographic breakdown of respondents propensity to pick up and take club night flyers, reveals the following: students are much more likely to pick up and collect flyers at least weekly (43%) compared to non-students (23%); the unemployed are more likely to pick up and collect flyers at least weekly (43%) than the employed (27%); younger people are much more likely to pick up and collect flyers at least weekly; and those aged 46+ do not pick up and collect club night flyers more often than monthly (16% monthly, 58% less than monthly and 25% never). When correlating age against the percentage of respondents who pick up and collect flyers at least weekly the resulting figure of -0.93 indicates a strong negative correlation between the two variables, which enforces the point that as clubbers age, they are less likely to pick up and take flyers.

Of those who picked up flyers, those most likely to do so regularly were also regular nightclub visitors, and those who were least likely to do so, or never did so were those who visited nightclubs less than once per month. Respondents were most likely to pick up and take flyers from nightclubs, followed by pubs and bars, and service industry retailers such as hairdressers, coffee shops, launderettes and takeaways.

When asked what aspect of a statically placed flyer might influence respondents to pick it up and take it away, 66% of respondents stated that special offer(s) promoted on the flyer was the main influence to respondents in picking up and taking a flyer with them, followed by information about a club night contained on the flyer (58%) and the design (colour, images and wording) (53%).  Other answers respondents gave in relation to this question included: special events being promoted on the flyer; mention of musicians, DJs or celebrities of interest to the respondent; interest in the music genre being promoted; and if the nightclub the flyer is for, is one that the respondent already likes.  Students (77%) and the unemployed (71%) are most enticed by special offers, as were younger respondents (18 – 26 year olds 73%) compared to older respondents (46 – 55 year olds 42%).

81% of respondents stated that they took nightclub flyers from people in the street.  The largest influence upon respondents for taking flyers from people in the street was the appearance of the person giving the flyer (42%), followed by a feeling by the respondent that they should take the flyer (41%), and then special offer(s) promoted on the flyer (40%).  Aspects of design and the information contained on the flyer were considered of a lesser importance to these. When respondents were given the opportunity to elaborate upon their response to this question numerous reasons were given, they have been categorised as follows: a feeling of pity for the distributor; flyer content; friendly sales technique by distributors; physical attractiveness of the distributor; flyering taking place in relevant locations; forceful distribution by distributors; respondents going through the motions of taking flyers; out of politeness; friendly appearance of the distributor; out of guilt; feeling under pressure to take one; a shared musical interest with the distributor; and the distributor appearing representative of the club night.

A number of respondents left negative comments in relation to on-street flyering, along with reasons for not accepting flyers from distributors.  These have been listed and categorised as follows: respondent annoyance; respondents being in the wrong target market; invasiveness of distributors; distributor overkill; discrimination of flyer distributors; poor sales technique of distributors; and respondent apathy.

A minority of respondents (32%) stated that they received nightclub flyers through their letterbox, of those 74% were students.  The comments made by respondents in relation to flyers that have been placed through their letterboxes are all negative.

Flyers that were picked up and taken by respondents were more likely to be kept for a period of days than those given in the street or posted through letterboxes.  Those flyers that were posted through letterboxes were most likely to be disposed of within seconds with an overall downward trend in terms of length of time that the flyers would be kept.  Those flyers that were given in the street were most likely to be kept for seconds or minutes before disposal, with an overall downward trend after minutes, in terms of time that the flyers would be kept.  For those flyers that were picked up and taken, the pattern is less clear, with the majorative answer being days, but with a second placed answer of minutes.

In total, respondents did not indicate that they would keep nightclub flyers for very long periods of time, with 54% of respondents indicating that they would dispose of flyers within seconds or minutes, 16% indicated they would keep flyers for a number of hours, and 21% indicated that they would keep flyers for days.  Only 9% of respondents indicated that they would keep flyers for over a week.

In terms of flyer design, some respondents revealed that aspects relating to special offers, flyer design, information being of interest, and flyers containing information about favoured artists may cause them to keep flyers for longer.  This section also highlights respondent annoyance at flyers containing information deemed by them as being irrelevant, which includes the names of ‘unknown’ DJs being listed on flyers.

When questioned qualitatively where else respondents come into the possession of club night flyers from, the answers given were as follows: friends (16%); from the floor (12%); in magazines and newspapers (12%); in promotional flyer packs (12%); under car windscreen wipers (8%); by email (8%); in shopping bags (8%); on tables outside bars (8%); in bar toilets (4%); with CDs (4%); given with change when buying drinks (4%); and printed on till receipts (4%).

Many respondents raised environmental concerns about the use of paper flyers, these were around: the litter caused by discarded flyers; and the opinion that the use of paper flyers is wasteful.

As a result of this survey recommendations have been made to nightclubs and club night promoters in Leeds, these will be featured in a future blog post.

Nightclub Promotion and Competition

Promotion is the sum of ‘activities that communicate the product or service and its merits to target customers and persuade them to buy’ (Kotler, 1994, p.1007).  Hackley and Tiwaskul (2006) discuss the concept of entertainment marketing and promotion as being one that leads to experiential consumption.  Nightclub promotion may be carried out by venues themselves, or by specialist third-party organisations and individuals who are brought in to promote themed nights within the nightclub to potential consumers.  Themed nights are known as club nights, and the organisations and individuals that undertake the task of promoting them to potential consumers are known as promoters (Moss, S, 2009).  KBA (1994) stated that promoters were a very important entity in the nightclub scene, they often set trends and are responsible for generating ideas for events, usually involving some form of entertainment, and often at their own expense.  Moss (2009) identified that promoters were often used where competition between nightclubs was fierce.  So called ‘student-cities’ (those cities that experience a boost in population during ‘term-time’ from college and university students), are one such example where a large demographic of residents of nightclub age are often heavily promoted to by nightclub promoters keen to attract custom.

The nightclub industry is a saturated and highly competitive marketplace (Skinner, Moss, G and Parfitt , 2005), effective target market segmentation, is therefore very important (Dibb, Stern and Wensley, 2002).  Within student cities competition is the most fierce at the beginning of the academic year (in the UK this is usually September), and at the beginning of new terms after vacation periods such as Christmas and Easter.  During this time, promoters are highly active, with many forms of visible promotion in key locations around student cities, such as: outside universities; within halls of residence; and on footpath areas where there are a large number of students passing by.  Such promotion is designed to entice new customers, and to reinforce brand awareness amongst existing customers (Moss, S, 2009).

When promoting products, organisations and events to students, it is important to target new students when they first arrive (Fakharzadeh and Todd, 2010).  This gives the opportunity to develop brand awareness before students form relationships with rival entities.  Useful locations to target students with flyers include ‘dorm halls, dining halls…and next to vending machines’ (Campion Devney, 1991, p.59).  Hayden (2006) additionally suggests student resource centres such as libraries, and university literature racks.

Nightclubs often portray a fun and ‘sexy’ image, which has been capitalised upon by nightclub promoters in their promotional materials, this is demonstrated in the figure below.  This has also been capitalised upon by third party companies who have used nightclubs to showcase their products, some examples include Applebelly and Lycos, who went in to partnership to promote the online dating service Love@Lycos within nightclubs (Anon, 2001).  Sepe, Ling and Glantz (2002) concur, and in their research into tobacco promotions in nightclubs, they found that promoters used ‘very attractive’ dancing girls, and ‘provocative games’ designed to entice young potential smokers, (p.415).  In research by Moss, G, Parfitt and Skinner (2008) into gender and nightclub visitation ‘men identified the opposite sex as the critical factor in the decision to select a venue…in this research one male focus group respondent suggested that the number of women…was important ‘for single lads definitely’’ (p.69).  Shapiro (2006) identified that nightclubs were promiscuous venues where young people would often meet to form sexual unions.  Haralambos and Holborn (2004) identified that the demographic of young people who visit nightclubs as being at an experimental stage in their lives, where risk-taking and adventure form a central part of their behaviour.

Examples of nightclub promotional materials that use sexual imagery.  Source: Santana, (2010).

Nightclubs compete against their rivals on a number of levels, any of the products they have may form the basis of competition.  Refurbishment and reinvention of popular nightclubs is commonplace, this is to maintain interest amongst client groups whose tastes change over time (Haussman, 2008). Keeping repeat customers is especially challenging for nightclubs, particularly with their young adult target market (Nancarrow, Nancarrow and Page, 2002), although continual re-invention is not realistic for many venues, and therefore other means of competing including those related to pricing and promotion are the norm (Moss, G, Parfitt and Skinner, 2008).  However, it has also been found that regular nightclub patrons who are highly involved with a particular club, brand or organisation are less likely to be swayed into visiting competitor venues on the basis of price or drinks promotions (Beatty and Kahle, 1988).  Nightclubs are a service industry, and there is a great deal of service industry marketing literature on the importance of service quality (Skinner, Moss, G and Parfitt , 2005).

The methods by which promoters communicate with potential customers varies from traditional paper based media such as posters and flyers, to electronic media such as social networking websites and email (Moss, S, 2009).  In 2006, London nightclub owner Mint Group shifted its promotional focus from traditional flyers to email marketing, and in doing so appointed a specialist e-marketing company to be responsible for sending out 60,000 emails per week to the Mint group’s customer database (Anon, 2006).  ‘Brand management and communication are evolving at lightning speed’ (Lehu, 2007, p.3), this is exemplified by the relatively recent uptake of online social media (particularly Facebook) by club promoters to build brands based around their club nights and to use social media as a cost-effective and relatively easy way to reach a potential audience with a promotional message.  Those aged 35 and under are the primary target segment of social media marketers (Tiltman, 2009), many of this demographic are also the primary target segment of club promoters, making online social media an ideal promotional medium.  The adoption of such technological marketing mediums gives a modern image, and can lead to increased sales (Anon, 1996).  ‘Kids are interested in the same things they’ve always been interested in, they’re just expressing it via different channels.  Chances are that if you don’t understand today’s consumer, you didn’t really understand yesterday’s’ (Tiltman, 2009).

It is clear that in a highly competitive marketplace a strong promotional strategy is essential for the survival of both nightclubs and club nights, in what has become a buyers-market, where consumers are presented with many choices, by which to spend their leisure pound.  Not only do nightclubs need to compete as physical venues against other venues, promoters need to compete against other promoters in promoting their particular club nights.  Promotional materials are often the primary means by which potential customers may learn of club nights, so therefore adopting a strategy that targets the correct people, using appropriate promotional media is an essential aspect in the business of nightclub and club night promotion.

Bibliography

Anon.  (1996) Tech marketing increases sales for two companies.  Marketing News.  14^th March, 1996, p.2.

Anon.  (2001) Marketing latest.  Marketing.  5^th March, 2001, p.10.

Anon.  (2006) Mint group to ditch flyers for email strategy.  Precision Marketing.  27^th January, 2006, p.3.

Campion Devney, D.  (1991) Organizing special events and conferences: A practical guide for busy volunteers and staff.  Sarasota, Florida, Pineapple Press.

Dibb, S., Stern, P.  and Wensley, R.  (2002) Marketing knowledge and the value of segmentation.  Marketing Intelligence and Planning.  Volume 20, Issue 2, pp.  113 – 119.

Fakharzadeh, C.  and Todd, M.  (2010) Student organization leadership.  Infinity Publications.

Hackley, C.  and Tiwaskul, R.  (2006) Entertainment marketing and experiential consumption.  Journal of Marketing Communications.  Volume 12, Issue 1, pp.  63 – 75.

Haralambos, M.  and Holborn, M.  (2004) Sociology themes and perspectives.  6^th ed.  London, Collins.

Haussman, G.  (2008) New Vegas nightlife: The hottest of the hot spots.  TravelAgent.  27^th October, 2008, pp.50 -  52.

Hayden, C.J.  (2006) Get clients now: A 28 day marketing program for professionals, consultants and coaches.  New York, AMACOM.

KBA.  Trend influence marketing program.  April 14, 1994.  cited in Sepe, E., Ling, P.  and Glantz, S.  (2002) Smooth moves: Bar and nightclub tobacco promotions that target young adults.  American Journal of Public Health.  March 2002, Vol.  92, No.3, pp.  414 – 419.

Kotler, P.  (1994) Marketing management: Analysis, planning, implementation and control.  8^th Edition.  Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Lehu, J.M.  (2007) Branded entertainment.  London, Kogan Page.

Moss, G., Parfitt, S.  and Skinner, H.  (2008) Men and women: Do they value the same things in mainstream nightclubs and bars? Tourism and Hospitality Research.  Volume 9, Issue 1, pp.  61 – 79.

Moss, S.  ed.  (2009) The entertainment industry: An introduction.  Wallingford, CAB International.

Nancarrow, C., Nancarrow, J.  and Page, J.  (2002) An analysis of the concept of cool and its marketing implications.  Journal of Consumer Behaviour.  Volume 1, Issue 4, pp.  311 – 322.

Santana, D.  (2010) DJ Emir design services.  [Internet] Englewood, Colorado, DJ Emir.  URL available from: Accessed 20^th August, 2010.

Sepe, E., Ling, P.  and Glantz, S.  (2002) Smooth moves: Bar and nightclub tobacco promotions that target young adults.  American Journal of Public Health.  March 2002, Vol.  92, No.3, pp.  414 – 419.

Shapiro, P.  (2005) Turn the beat around: The secret history of disco.  New York, Faber and Faber.

Skinner, H., Moss, G.  and Parfitt, S.  (2005) Nightclubs and bars: What do customers really want?.  International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management.  Vol.  17, Issue 2, pp.  114 – 124.

Tiltman, D.  (2009) Why there’s more to digital than skinny jeans and trips to nightclubs.  Media.  19^th November, 2009, p.7.

The Business of Nightclub Promotion

It may well be a clichéd saying that ‘life is a rollercoaster’, but I can share with you first hand that the life of a club promoter is full of ups and downs, dictated by a number of factors, some of which are within the control of the promoter, but many other factors are in the external environment, and there isn’t a thing that can be done about them. Before I go into detail, I’ll explain a little more about what a promoter actually does, and how they relate to nightclubs from a business perspective.

First of all the word ‘promoter’ is defined by the 2008 Oxford English Dictionary as a ‘person who…promotes, advances, or furthers any movement, project, institution, etc.; an encourager; a supporter’. A club promoter carries out a function, which is key to the marketing strategy of a nightclub – promotion, one of the four Ps of the marketing mix.

A nightclub is a venue, or a unit, a versatile space that can be themed with props and décor and utilised for a variety of purposes. The main function of a nightclub is the night-time entertainment on offer – typically music played by a DJ, as well as the sale of drinks (mainly alcoholic) and sometimes other refreshments. Visitors to a club typically participate in recreational socialisation activities, the predominant one being dancing, but attracting potential partners is also high on many people’s agendas, and as such clubs are perceived as being ‘sexy’ venues, which is something that promoters often latch onto, ‘sex sells’ is a very true adage.

The relationship between clubs and promoters varies from club to club, it is very often the case that one is in a stronger position than the other, so can dictate terms. This can be influenced by a number of factors, but a strong and concurrent factor is competition. In an urban area where there are many clubs in close proximity, the competition is likely to be strong between them to attract customers, especially when the product being offered is very often similar. In a scenario where a club is not reaching its potential in terms of footfall and bar revenue, a promoter is likely to be in a stronger position to be able to dictate financial terms with a club as to their involvement. A typical scenario, is that the promoter keeps the entry revenue, and the club keeps the bar revenue, but there are also situations where a percentage of either may be shared with the other party. There is also the issue of entertainment within the club, and who will pay for that, the promoter or the club, this is typically down to the promoter, but there can be financial splits with the club also. This is a very simplified explanation, but at many clubs it is as straight forward as that. However, there is also strong competition between rival promoters who are keen to expand their business, where this happens a club can be in a stronger position to dictate terms. This is an example of: competition; the power of buyers; the power of suppliers; and the threat of new entrants; which are four of Michael Porter’s Five Forces.

Of course some clubs specialise and put on particular nights aimed at a specific market segments, for example The Cockpit in Leeds is both a club and live music venue, but the ‘club’ aspect is one that is targeted towards fans of ‘alternative’ music i.e. not main stream ‘pop’. Therefore within Leeds they are not in direct competition with the likes of Halo or Oceana, who both predominantly run nights centred around pop music, ‘cheesie disco’, RnB, dance, and commercial basslines. The Cockpit are however in direct competition with other alternative music clubs and venues.

The city of Leeds, West Yorkshire, England, is an excellent example of an urban area with a high concentration of nightclubs and hybrid bars within a short distance of each other, the largest of which is the Luminar Leisure owned Oceana, and the smallest being any one of many hybrid bars. A hybrid bar is a late opening bar with DJ and dancefloor that functions as a combination of both pub and club. In England and Wales these have largely appeared since the advent of the 2003 Licensing Act, which relaxed the rules around opening hours and entertainment. When Oceana opened in Leeds, it signalled the death knell for many other Leeds clubs, early casualties were Creation and Majestyk (also owned by Luminar) and Halo – which since re-opened largely thanks to their main promoters at the time The Absolute Life (now Voodoo Events). What Oceana offered, was nine themed areas that could accommodate for different tastes – it was also new, and in Leeds (as in many other cities) the ‘new’ club becomes perceived to be ‘the place to be’.

Leeds is also a ‘student city’ in the sense that it has two large universities, as well as a number of further and higher education colleges. There are an estimated 100,000 students in and around Leeds who are 18 or over, and these are prime targets for club owners and promoters. Many students in Leeds are seasonal residents, who are there predominantly for term time only, but others are permanent residents, and as such the year fluctuates in terms of population.

The busiest time by far in Leeds is the September to November period of the Autumn term, when many students move to Leeds for the first time, and when student loans have been paid, so there is an early peak of student affluence. This is when promoters are at their fiercest in terms of competition, to try and get students ‘on board’ at their club nights. At this time of year promoters use a combination of both traditional and innovative methods to promote club nights, these include: posters; billboards; flyers; websites; web 2.0 particularly Facebook, Bebo and MySpace; giveaways including t-shirts, CDs, sweets, and drinks; eye-catching decorated vehicles such as monster trucks, smart cars, and travelling billboards; and by paying big name acts or celebrities to appear at venues. This can often be a loss-leader as it is an investment for the longer term. The ‘peak’ times for club promoters in student cities are: the beginning of the academic year in September / October; Halloween; just prior to the Christmas vacation; the beginning of the second semester in late January / early February; Valentines; St. Patrick’s day; the weeks before the Easter vacation; the week after the Easter Vacation; and the end of the academic year in early May.

An essential weapon in any club promoter’s army, are students – especially those who live in halls of residence, where they can slip in ‘under the radar’ with flyers and posters, and where tickets can be sold door-to-door. Many students (especially first years) relish the opportunity to be seen amongst their peers as the ‘cool kids’ who can get in to clubs for free, and often into VIP areas due to their promoter connections – for many this is their payment for working for a promoter, although some do get a financial ‘cut’ on the number of tickets that they sell. Some of these students are also studying relevant courses such as Entertainment Management, and as such gain an industry insight through their vocational activities. The most talented student promoters often go on to become promoters working for themselves, promoting their own nights that they put together on limited budgets, and largely taking advantage of networks of friends, who can not only help promote, but who can also DJ and help entertain the audience.

One person acting as a student / promoter / DJ is not uncommon, an example of a very successful one is Kane Towny who started off with fairly small and modest nights targeted towards a young and often ‘chav’ audience (and I don’t mean that in a derogatory sense), but who now runs very successful nights around the increasingly commercial bassline scene. Kane, and business partners were early adopters of the bassline scene in Leeds, and have turned it into something bigger and more glamorous than what many others have managed to do. As such they are making Leeds and their signature ‘Movement’ nights market leaders on the bassline scene. Most recently, Kane was one of three partners who organised Movement 2 at Victoria Works in Leeds, which featured over 30 DJs, and eight live performers spread over three arenas. On the night, well over 2,000 people who had paid up to £30 each for a ticket, turned up to the event, which was an outstanding success, and will be followed by four more ‘Movement’ parties in 2009.

Movement 2 @ Victoria Works, November 2008

This type of success doesn’t go unnoticed by jealous rivals, and often threats and underhand tricks such as advertising that nights have been cancelled are the norm. The most unscrupulous rivals will even employ people to set off fire alarms at ‘rival’ nights, or persistently cause fights or problems at venues, in order to break up the ambience and put off customers from returning. This means that promoters need to be prepared, and the first line of defence are club security. At many clubs, security are the responsibility of the venue rather than the promoter, but there is a great need for all to work closely together. At Movement the security was the responsibility of the promoters, who employed a highly visible and strong security presence, which controlled access in and out of the venue, as well as airport style metal detectors at the front entrance. This was a sophisticated set-up, but it needed to be. Victoria works is well out of the city centre, and there are no CCTV cameras on the badly lit streets around it, a good security presence minimises risk, and risk management is another responsibility that a promoter needs to take on board. It is entirely likely that after the success of the first two Movement nights, that the Movement parties of 2009 will be in a more central and secure location, such as the Leeds Academy, that has the capacity, and lessens the risks involved. If Movement continues to grow, it’s home in a few years time could well be the new Leeds Arena, which may seem like a long way off to many, but what is happening with the bassline scene is hardly different to what happened with the ‘house’ and ‘rave’ scene in the early 90s.

The founders of Cream began with a small house night, before moving to the Nation nightclub, and attracting names such as Paul Oakenfold and Sasha. Today the Creamfields festival takes place annually in the UK as well as varying locations abroad, and Cream run a regular night at Amnesia in Ibiza during the main club season, it is a multi-million pound business. Similar ‘seeds’ that have grown into ‘giant beanstalks’ are Godsktichen, and Ministry of Sound. It will be interesting to see what has happened to Movement in ten years time, but the pride, tenacity and commitment of those behind it, certainly bodes well for its future.

Finally, a warning to the wannabes who see this apparently fun, vibrant, sexy, cash-cow – be warned, the majority of club promoters, never make it beyond their first night, unscrupulous venue owners, competition, and the weather are just three of the rungs on the rickety success ladder that need to be climbed – there are many more. For those that do make it beyond their first night, life is hard and certainly not glamorous. Standing in the freezing cold on nightclub steps while drunken revellers try to blag their way in for a freebie loses its sex appeal pretty quickly, especially when abuse is hurled by them after a knock-back. For many, life as a club promoter is a hit and miss affair, few manage to get ‘regular’ successful slots, and those that do, have to fight to stay ahead of their rivals, this is a business where you can’t afford to be complacent, and as such promoters need to be proactive and energetic with drive, ambition and determination in abundance – if you haven’t got that, stick to being a customer.

Before I finish, I’ll share with you some personal experiences of success and….well not success. Firstly the success – F-Block Party, we have held three of these now and they have all been charity fundraisers for both Cancer Research UK, and St. Gemma’s Hospice. Our most recent one was the most successful yet, attracting 700 customers, and raising £1,130 for Cancer Research. This took several weeks of planning, assisted by the excellent and helpful people of Voodoo Events and Halo. A team of my own students promoted this event around Leeds Met and in halls of residence. To show you how low promoters can go, a jealous rival (who will remain nameless so as not to give them publicity), attempted to hijack the night by putting on their own ‘spoiler event’ at a local club, and targeting it at our captive audience of students that study in F-Building at Leeds Met (and incorrectly advertising it as an official night). Our night was for charity, their night was a commercial enterprise….a pretty scummy trick, but unfortunately one which the more unscrupulous promoters are prepared to do. I’m pleased to say that they failed miserably, and we had a record-breaking night whilst one of our ‘spys’ counted under 50 at their venue.

F-Block Party @ Halo, October 2008

Now for the not success…..a combination of poor timing, apathy, lack of finances, competition, looming assessment deadlines…..and an unexpected cold spell, which lead to SNOW (we never get snow these days), meant that our recent Beach themed club night aimed at students, attracted vastly fewer students than what we had hoped for, and whilst it made a modest profit for a good cause – it’s not something that I’ll be singing about in future. Even the most successful promoters have had stinkers, if they say otherwise then they’re liars, but if you want to be a club promoter, taking the rough with the smooth is par for the course, that rollercoaster ride does have ups, but there are also many downs.