Wednesday 20 February 2013

When is a shoestring budget really too short?


Small, tiny and in some cases non-existent budgets are all too common working in the arts. Over the years I have worked on lots of projects where there has been such a small budget that I have had to beg and borrow as much as I can to actually get things off the ground. And, as any artist knows, having constraints means you have to be creative, and that’s what makes great art!

However, for the last five years I have been working in a large performing arts centre, where the budgets are bigger, but so are the costs and risks. In this kind of environment, begging and borrowing is much harder, and sometimes impossible when you are bound by government policy and procedure.

I have done a lot of arts project scoping work, and as part of my research into potential projects, looking at the budget is one of the most important aspects. The big question is always, how do you know if you really have enough money to undertake the project?

When setting budgets, some of the considerations I make are:

·         Understand your total maximum revenue base, be it tickets, grant funding, sponsorship etc.

·         Understand the fixed and variable costs and look at what kind of scenarios could make the costs change

·         Don't forget ancillary costs (and revenue!) – all the little things that can add up on a big project – staging consumables, catering, complimentary tickets etc.

·         Assess what knowledge and experience you have in house, do you need to recruit additional staff, and if so, what is the real cost of that?

·         What was the financial cost of the project previously, or, if it is a new project, then something similar that the organisation has done before?

·         What has changed in the environment or in the scale of the project that might have an impact on costs?

·         Work out the risk level of your project – what happens if it only performs half as well as expected? Can you afford the financial risk and who will cover the shortfall?


By going through this process you will begin to see whether or not your project is viable. If a sell-out show won’t cover the costs, and you don’t have grant subsidy to offset the difference, then you might have to reconsider what you want to do. And if you can make the budget balance, go for it! 

3 comments:

  1. You might be curious to know about a new festival called StripFest which has NO budget, or to be more precise, no expenses, which is in fact its intention. The festival is based on a model of relationship brokering. It merely connects venues with artists, artists with audiences, venues with customers and people with each other. It doesn't profess to be producing anything other than what the venues and artists want to do (at their own expense). Interesting model and well worth a look: www.stripfest.org

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for this Valentina - sound advice. One other thought I would add is "being realistic in revenue projections". I'm sure we've all seen revenue projections be made to fit the shortfall instead of the other way around. At times people are so keen and enthusiastic to get the project off the ground that they don't undertake the sensitivity analysis i.e. what if the Box Office is 20% less than projected? It is also important to look at what the effect is if Box Office is 20% higher (what costs will increase i.e.royalties etc) but the latter is the aim ! Cheers James

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi James - I totally agree, undertaking a detailed sensitivity analysis is really important for any project that has ticketing revenue. And yes, realistic revenue projections is tricky - selling tickets in the current climate can be difficult - if you don't do the market research then you add another layer of risk. Ideas for more blog posts - thanks! Valentina

      Delete