SHARE

As a result of underwhelming ticket sales, ASCMC will face a loss estimated at $25,000 following the LMFAO concert on April 2nd at Bridges Auditorium.

Deficient public support for the concert seems to have been a major cause of  its lackluster performance at the box office.  Although CMC students showed a high interest and purchased nearly all of the tickets that had been allotted to them, barely 40% of tickets designated for general admission were sold.  As a result, only 1,445 of 2,450 seats available were filled.

Numerous factors contributed to the financial loss resulting from the event.  Aside from low ticket sales to the public, interest in the concert from the other four Claremont Colleges was lower than expected.  ASCMC sold few tickets in bulk to student governments at Scripps College and Pitzer College and sold none in bulk to either Pomona College or Harvey Mudd College.  It is unclear how many students from these colleges attended the concert.

ASCMC also overestimated the interest of the public in the event.  After the Lupe Fiasco concert and the John Legend concert, both of which benefited from significant demand from beyond the Consortium, ASCMC had anticipated similar support for this event, a level of support that, unfortunately, never materialized.

Both the current and previous staff of the ASCMC Executive Board took steps to boost ticket sales after it became clear that many of the tickets just weren’t selling.  Previous ASCMC Executive Board President Tammy Phan explained that the her Executive Board “reached out to local colleges” and “to local high schools” in an attempt to drum up support for LMFAO.

After spring break, the new Executive Board pursued similar tactics.  Current ASCMC President Jessica Mao explained that her administration and members from the Dean of Students targeted “local schools and colleges” and started “posting the concert in local periodicals and online newsletters, as well as tracking down radio stations set-up at clubs to give away tickets and broadcast the concert.” They also reached out again to their counterparts at other schools.  But with just over a week left until the concert, these efforts were too little, too late.

ASCMC’s elections, which occurred just weeks before the concert, seem to have had a negative impact on ticket sales.  As current President of ASCMC, Jessica Mao notes that “election time came and diverted our previous board’s  attention.  The roles of the previous board members became ambiguous as the transition into the new administration kicked off and spring break arrived, creating a period longer than a week where the event went unnoticed and sold very few tickets. I think the timing of all of this took away from the focus of promoting LMFAO to the 5-C’s and general public.”

It is important to note that, although significant, the losses that will be experienced by ASCMC resulting from the LMFAO concert remain significantly lower than those resulting from the Lupe Fiasco concert of last year, which, according to former ASCMC Vice President Chris Jones, caused a “$50,000 loss for the organization.”  Phan added that “last year, a huge problem was damages” to Bridges Auditorium, which ran up the bill for the Lupe Fiasco concert significantly, and that this year they “tried to minimize that.”  Despite those losses, Jones noted that CMC was able to make a profit off  the John Legend concert of last semester.

Regardless of the efforts of both the current and previous Executive Boards, the LMFAO concert still resulted in losses to ASCMC.  President Jessica Mao, however, reassures students that “the additional costs will come out of our remaining budget for the year, but it will not affect clubs or student life in any way. Current club and event budgets will stay the same, and we will keep a close eye on our expenditures so that we can maintain a balanced budget in these final weeks.”  Still, the $25,000 that was lost must be accounted for in some fashion, and students will see ASCMC’s budget tighten as a result.

 

52 COMMENTS

  1. By “Local Colleges,” they clearly meant VERY local since every one of my friends at Cal Poly Pomona, only seven miles away, did not know that the tickets were available to the general public.

    Also, I don’t see whats ambiguous about “the transition into the new administration.” The ASCMC constitution, which I realize the executive board often skirts, clearly states that the new officers are sworn in on the first Monday following Spring Break and that until then, the “prior” executive board still has to do its job. Evidenced by jmao’s statement, they clearly neglected their jobs for at least a week, or probably two as preparing for elections was time consuming. They cost us $25,000. The semesterly-stipend should be eliminated, or at the very least reduced, for those officers who were supposed to ensure the success of this night. Of course, this won’t happen, but it would be awesome if there were some accountability and not just a “my bad” to explain the student body’s loss of $25,000 worth of benefits.

    And sorry, you can’t lose $25,000 (around 10% of our budget) without affecting “student life in anyway.” That is, unless they were planning on wasting $25,000 on things that wouldn’t “affect student life in anyway,” in which case it would be best to simply disband the ASCMC and start anew. Seriously, jmao there’s no need to lie to our faces about EVERYTHING you do. ASCMC, you’ve already made a sham out of the appointment process, recklessly lost 25K, and treated us like complete idiots (I’m assuming they just lied about affecting student life as opposed to the more ominous instance of them planning on squandering the money), can you please show some accountability for these mistakes and be transparent about it?

    • I agree with the need for transparency and for someone to be accountable for the losses, but there is really no reason to attack Jessica for lying. Your concerns over the budget are valid, but character attacks are immature and petty. She is going to do the best that she can in making up for the losses and ATTEMPT to keep student life as unaffected as possible. With only a few weeks out of her year appointment down, it must be hard to know exactly from where the money is going to come and the details of the next budget for the next year. I know for a fact that she was talking to every person she could for the last few weeks in order to sell tickets. Unless you know that you could have done better, and ran for ASCMC President (in which case you should uphold your movement for transparency and put your name on your post when you accuse people of lying) then it is better for you to argue policies and not people.
      Keep in mind, as well, that Cal Poly is a school of over 20,000 students, it is possible that ASCMC did their best and it was advertised to many students that just didn’t happen to be your friends.

      • She is the president of a corporation. We are voting members of said corporation and as such we have a vested interest in seeing an adequate redistribution of our student fees. She should be held responsible for what she tells us. If she continues to lie, there is nothing wrong with attacking her lies. I am not attacking her as a person. I haven’t called her dumb, ugly, or other pejorative terms. I have brought to light statements she has made that are false. If you think calling someone on their bullshit is “immature and petty,” I don’t think we see eye-to-eye well enough to discuss this. However, I’ll assume otherwise:

        If she doesn’t know “exactly from where the money is going to come,” she should not make grandiose claims that this loss will not affect our student life. And to be honest, it’s pretty clear that NOT having $25,000 is SIGNIFICANTLY different than having $25,000. Simply “keeping a close eye on expenditures” is not going to save us $25,000 without affecting student life. And if it does, the CFO has some explaining to do. It doesn’t take a financial scholar or CMC Budget savant to figure that out.

        You should also look into what campaign promises for transparency were all about. They were trying to promote honesty and straightforwardness from our elected, and appointed, officials of our student government/corporation. It was not a movement to systematically eliminate free and anonymous speech. I’ll keep my anonymity until there is a reason not to.

        Instead, ASCMC needs to treat this as it is: a giant clusterfuck. We lost (or unexpectedly subsidized an event for) $25,000. First, we need to recognize this fact, and that it will limit some of the awesome activities ASCMC would otherwise sponsor. Second, we need to find who is at fault, why it happened, how to stop it from happening again, or at the very least mitigate it’s affects. Third, we need to decide how to distribute the cost. Putting them all on the senior class for the last 6 weeks of their final year at CMC does not seem that fair. THESE are, at the very least, the issues she should talk about, not half-hearted assurances that everything is going to be normal sans $25,000.

      • She is the president of a corporation. We are voting members of said corporation and as such we have a vested interest in seeing an adequate redistribution of our student fees. She should be held responsible for what she tells us. If she continues to lie, there is nothing wrong with attacking her lies. I am not attacking her as a person. I haven’t called her dumb, ugly, or other pejorative terms. I have brought to light statements she has made that are false. If you think calling someone on their bullshit is “immature and petty,” I don’t think we see eye-to-eye well enough to discuss this. However, I’ll assume otherwise:

        If she doesn’t know “exactly from where the money is going to come,” she should not make grandiose claims that this loss will not affect our student life. And to be honest, it’s pretty clear that NOT having $25,000 is SIGNIFICANTLY different than having $25,000. Simply “keeping a close eye on expenditures” is not going to save us $25,000 without affecting student life. And if it does, the CFO has some explaining to do. It doesn’t take a financial scholar or CMC Budget savant to figure that out.

        You should also look into what campaign promises for transparency were all about. They were trying to promote honesty and straightforwardness from our elected, and appointed, officials of our student government/corporation. It was not a movement to systematically eliminate free and anonymous speech. I’ll keep my anonymity until there is a reason not to.

        Instead, ASCMC needs to treat this as it is: a giant clusterfuck. We lost (or unexpectedly subsidized an event for) $25,000. First, we need to recognize this fact, and that it will limit some of the awesome activities ASCMC would otherwise sponsor. Second, we need to find who is at fault, why it happened, how to stop it from happening again, or at the very least mitigate it’s affects. Third, we need to decide how to distribute the cost. Putting them all on the senior class for the last 6 weeks of their final year at CMC does not seem that fair. THESE are, at the very least, the issues she should talk about, not half-hearted assurances that everything is going to be normal sans $25,000.

  2. By “Local Colleges,” they clearly meant VERY local since every one of my friends at Cal Poly Pomona, only seven miles away, did not know that the tickets were available to the general public.

    Also, I don’t see whats ambiguous about “the transition into the new administration.” The ASCMC constitution, which I realize the executive board often skirts, clearly states that the new officers are sworn in on the first Monday following Spring Break and that until then, the “prior” executive board still has to do its job. Evidenced by jmao’s statement, they clearly neglected their jobs for at least a week, or probably two as preparing for elections was time consuming. They cost us $25,000. The semesterly-stipend should be eliminated, or at the very least reduced, for those officers who were supposed to ensure the success of this night. Of course, this won’t happen, but it would be awesome if there were some accountability and not just a “my bad” to explain the student body’s loss of $25,000 worth of benefits.

    And sorry, you can’t lose $25,000 (around 10% of our budget) without affecting “student life in anyway.” That is, unless they were planning on wasting $25,000 on things that wouldn’t “affect student life in anyway,” in which case it would be best to simply disband the ASCMC and start anew. Seriously, jmao there’s no need to lie to our faces about EVERYTHING you do. ASCMC, you’ve already made a sham out of the appointment process, recklessly lost 25K, and treated us like complete idiots (I’m assuming they just lied about affecting student life as opposed to the more ominous instance of them planning on squandering the money), can you please show some accountability for these mistakes and be transparent about it?

  3. The real failure here is ASCMC’s ability to control their own publication. How the hell did this story get written…

    This is the problem with “transparency.”

      • “Still, the $25,000 that was lost must be accounted for in some fashion, and students will see ASCMC’s budget tighten as a result.”

        How big was the band fund? Does the author of this article know how ASCMC accounting works??

    • Wow. “control their own publication.”

      Have past ASCMC administrations exercised editorial control over the Forum to prevent being criticized? If so, then you might as well quit calling the Forum a newspaper and rename it Public Relations.

      Geez. Move to North Korea, or something, if you think a government’s job is to spread propaganda to its constituents.

      Props to Heath, et al. for publishing something critical of ASCMC! I hope the good work will continue!

      • The point is that they published something critical of ASCMC that was complete hogwash. Griffith didn’t do his research and clearly doesn’t understand how ASCMC works – from accounting to execution.

        Shame on Heath and Co., off to a start that undermines the integrity of the publication.

  4. The real failure here is ASCMC’s ability to control their own publication. How the hell did this story get written…

    This is the problem with “transparency.”

  5. The idea that the $25,000 that ASCMC spent to bring LMFAO to campus is a “loss” is somewhat misleading. First of all, as stated above, the ASCMC budget has a band fund, as well as other line items for things such as damages, etc. These are the places that the money to cover the concert will come from, and events such as LMFAO are exactly what this money was set aside for. And as the author correctly states, concerts often cost much more money for ASCMC than LMFAO did, so the idea of spending large amounts of money on musical artists is certainly not unprecedented.

    That being said, ASCMC did lose a bit more money than was originally projected for the concert, but that’s what happens when you sell the best seats to CMC students at a subsidy, and try to sell the worse seats to the public for more. The idea that “poor” ticket sales to the public is all ASCMC’s fault is misguided. While it was ASCMC’s responsibility to advertise to the public, which they did, ASCMC ultimately has much less control over advertising and sales to the general public than they do to the student body. And as the author also correctly points out, the amount of tickets sold to CMC students was about level with the numbers from past concerts such as Lupe, and in that way, was definitely a success on the college-only level.

    Overall, I think it’s important to keep in mind that ASCMC spends money on events, and this is just another example of that. While the exact cost won’t be clear until we get final reports from Bridges, most to all of the money will be taken from funds like the Band Fund, General Fund, Damages Fund, (all of which are for exactly expenditures of this nature) and line-items for events that did not happen this year. Therefore, there will be minimal to noimpact to more general event funds such as class funds and SAC/DAC funds, and we will also definitely not have to touch club or dorm fund allocations. And most importantly, Jessica Mao did a great job, and by no means lied to the student body. The fact that this article is out at all is evidence of that. She took a hand that was dealt to her and played it like a champ. She did her best to sell tickets, especially to CMC students (to whom her first responsibility is) and performed on-par with other concerts, and is not lying when she says that the cost will have no impact on student life (as I explained above).

    ASCMC did lose a little money on something unexpected, but show me a year that that doesn’t happen and I’ll show you… well, probably nothing, because that never doesn’t happen. This is something important for everyone to discuss, but it is not a catastrophe for the student body by any means.

      • I’ll interpret you calling her out on a minor grammatical point to be your way of saying you have nothing of substance to add to the conversation.

  6. The reason the 25,000 “loss” will not affect ASCMC’s activity for the rest of the year is that a substantial amount of this was previously budgeted for. Unfortunately, this article does not communicate that fact. ASCMC (for better or worse) spends basically all of its money for each year. The decision by the past administration was that ASCMC would spend a substantial portion of the budget on a concert, and LMFAO was ultimately the decision. Calling the LMFAO expenditure a loss is identical to calling the White Party a loss, or the Wedding Party a loss. These are events which are substantially funded via ASCMC’s planned spending of student fees, and supplemented with the additional purchase of tickets.

    I understand ASCMC can be a frustrating organization to deal with. There is significant lack of transparency and it seems at times as if a few students are simply controlling things from a backroom. While this has some validity, in the end ASCMC officers have a pretty mundane and unglamorous job. If you disagree, I would suggest looking for ASCMC board members at the end of a major event. Chances are they are cleaning up, dealing with security issues or worrying about whether Glitchmob’s pita chips are organic.

    It is undeniable the LMFAO was not a success. But in the end, the ASCMC executive board, both past and present, attempted to create a Lupe/Luda like event with a much smaller budget (one which couldn’t sustain a $50,000 “loss”). Jessica Mao took over this problem with little knowledge of the current financial crisis, as she had done little work on LMFAO with the past administration. She put forth a valiant effort to make the concert a financially neutral event by driving to meet with other college student governments and student activity offices. It is not surprising off-campus schools were uninterested in purchasing blocks of tickets days before the event. On campus efforts were just as feverish. Connor Barclays almost pushed through a last minute 500 ticket purchase from Pomona which would have created $15,000 in additional revenues. Other board members had similar interactions at the other colleges.

    I am sure every member of the ASCMC board feels responsible for this event. I am sure none of them will hang their proverbial hats on this event and feel proud. What I am also sure of, however, is that we did our absolute best to mitigate the financial effect of the concert, given an incredible time crunch. What I do know is that ASCMC will be financially sound and have the resources required to attain all of our goals going forward. There will be a Marathon Party. There will be a Pirate Party. There will continue to a plethora of SLC events which I don’t attend but I know many of you do. While it is true our budget will be pinched, I can assure you life will go on as usual here at CMC and the ASCMC board will do all in our power to ensure that the rest of the year is the best possible.

    • FYI, nobody “almost pushed through” a last minute ticket purchase from Pomona. The proposition was basically that Pomona assume some of ASCMC’s debt: ASCMC would sell Pomona 500 tickets at a ‘discount’ of $20/ticket, ASPC could try to sell them to PO students ONE WEEK BEFORE THE CONCERT for $25 each and make a $5 profit on each ticket….when any student could buy them at the box office for $25.

  7. Did ASCMC actually use the data collected in seeking insight from students regarding their choice of artist and venue, because I know VERY FEW people who were excitied about the LMFAO choice, especially given a venue such as Bridges? If anything I am more dissapointed they weren’t more transparent about the options we had in artists to bring in and venues the concert could be held, and the event suffered as a result. There is no denying that.

    • 1. Despite you knowing “very few” people here who were excited, CMC still filled its portion of the ticket quota.
      2. While I agree w/ you (and many of the above commenters) that ASCMC has its flaws, and we should work to correct those, resorting to direct democracy/popular consensus is a terrible idea. You think ASCMC is inefficient? Imagine all 1200 students arguing over who we should bring. We elect ASCMC to streamline these decisions, not make them perfectly in accordance with everyone’s preferences. (though I agree we should hold ASCMC more accountable so they don’t stray TOO far from constituent demand)

  8. Agreed, honestyandaccountability, why is our past financial advisor staying on after a budget shortfall last year? And why were Neal Kemp, Drew Oetting, and JMao given a $100 stipend by Tammy and their own board in a meeting less than a week before the concert, even with the budget pinch? Who voted for this? You are right Drew, there is a lack of transparency in the ascmc back room.

    • Don’t forget the Senate Pizza Fund! Senate treats itself to weekly Pizza and Cheesy Bread 30 minutes before snack, using money that could be used to offset losses from LMFAO, fund student trips and clubs, or other useful events.

      • That’s absolutely not true, my friend. Senate voted for a ONE time pizza night purchase of $100 for ONE meeting we had with a particularly long agenda. It was a small treat for those who diligently attend our weekly meetings. No Senate Pizza Fund exists.

        Trust me, we do not have weekly Cheesy Bread and Pizza. I wish…

        Also, before leaving sassy Forum comments criticizing our dear Senate, please my friend, consider becoming a Senator yourself. Clearly, you haven’t bothered to attend any Senate meetings this year. I assure you – we’d be happy to have you!

        Love dearly,
        Your friendly neighborhood ASCMC Senate Clerk

        • @Caroline, this is a blatant lie – I’ve been to 5 or 6 senate meetings this year. 3 had pizza. And cheesy bread.

        • Darling, we’ve had pizza three times but for clarification if has only come out of the Senate Budget once, which was the one time I described above.

          I’d appreciate you bite your tongue before you attack my integrity anonymously, that was not a “blatant lie.” Senate has only used it’s budget for Pizza once; I can assure you of the veracity of that statement.

          Best,
          Caroline

        • maybe the lack of pizza is why no one goes to senate any more…back in the days when legends like BFuerst and KAlsofrom ran ASCMC every meeting (at least of DAC) had one (or more of the following): pizza, chinese food, smoothies, in-n-out, milkshakes.

          Those were the days

        • Darling, we’ve had pizza three times but for clarification if has only come out of the Senate Budget once, which was the one time I described above.

          I’d appreciate you bite your tongue before you attack my integrity anonymously, that was not a “blatant lie.” Senate has only used it’s budget for Pizza once; I can assure you of the veracity of that statement.

          Best,
          Caroline

        • Yeah…Having been a Senator for two years( although abroad this semester) I can assure you that pizza is not at all common in a meeting. Caroline’s correct.

    • I am unsure of what you mean by a ‘budget shortfall.’ ASCMC’s revenues are constant and our expenditures from last year will be such that we easily meet all obligations from this revenue.

      In regards to the stipend, I can assure you none of the presidential advisors signed up so they would be paid $100. In fact, I was unaware I was getting anything until the meeting. Who voted for it? The students did when they voted Tammy Phan in as president and gave her the constitutionally vested power of appointing advisors.

    • Drew has contributed a ton to ASCMC the past semester and earned his $100 stipend, as did the other presidential advisor Jessica Mao and webmaster Neal Kemp. It probably amounted to a rate of $2 dollars an hour for all the work they put in. The ASCMC board voted to approve this in the first meeting, because the three deserved it. Also, Tammy (no longer an ASCMC board member, btw) asking for the $300 in stipends was before most people in the meeting knew that there would be losses because of the concert which was explained by Jessica to the rest of the board later in the first meeting.

      Drew, Chris and Lacey work their butts off for our school to keep our clubs/events well-funded, there is no reason they should be chastised for the choices of the whole board. Obviously, if it was known that enough tickets couldn’t be sold, and that there would be 1000 empty seats in bridges on Saturday, another artist would have been chosen.

      To blame them for the concert, and to say that they do not deserve their rightful share of these funds is not right. As Drew stated, no one is hanging their hat on this as a huge achievement, but it is still nonetheless impressive that our school of 1000 can bring and fund a band like LMFAO.

    • Hey Questions,

      You’re right. I just love living off the (student) government dime. Making less than $1 an hour is the only reason I work for ASCMC

      Neal

  9. There are a variety of things that I would like to address from what has been written today:

    The first and main thing I would like to say is that I think both in this article and the comments section, Tammy and I were not properly blamed. Ultimately, we were the driving forces in making this happen, and we should shoulder the blame from this event not being a success. I can honestly say that when we pulled the trigger, we believed that the event would be much much more successful than it was, and if you think we do not care about the result or that we are not losing sleep over this you are very much mistaken. We made a calculated thought-out decision in good faith that we could throw a successful concert that would be budget neutral, or at worst a minor loss. We did not make this decision because we personally love LMFAO or because we don’t care how ASCMC money is spent, we made it because we thought we were doing the best possible thing for the student body, given the price and availability of “major” acts. That did not turn out to be the case, and we apologize for it.

    However, Jessica Mao and the rest of the outstanding members of the new Executive Board of ASCMC, put in absolutely heroic efforts to attempt to make this event a success. This is extremely notable, because they could have cowered at the idea that they were dealt a terrible hand or rightfully said that dealing with this sort of problem -a problem that they did not create or expect- was not what they signed up for. Instead, they more than stepped up and put in amazing effort to make this event a success, and I believe they should be commended for doing so, rather than crucified.

    That’s why, of all the things that have been said about LMFAO, it kills me most of all that people are targeting or blaming members of the new board, and its president, Jessica Mao. If you all would like to target someone or vent your anger or borrow Jim Naul’s Caps Lock Key, and you would like it to go to someone or some place that deserves it, I suggest that you aim it at Tammy and I. You can do this on the forum comment section, you can say it to our faces (I’m usually not very hard to find), you can send us the real life equivalent of a “Howler” (Box #626) or you can send us an angry email from a newly created anonymous (or not) email account (I would suggest [email protected] or [email protected], though I have not verified that those are not taken). You all should blame Tammy and I for our actions, and I ask, or rather implore you to allow the new members of ASCMC to have what I believe is their deserved chance to prove to you that they are capable of doing amazing things

    I would also like to address some other comments or general things that have come up:

    1) ASCMC will more than “survive” financially. This by no means excuses the fact that the $25,000 or whatever the final number is could have been used more productively, but I am 0% concerned about ASCMC’s current and future ability to provide students with a great experience at the level they have come to expect.

    2) Transparency starts with this article, with the fact that ASCMC (current and old) actively encouraged that it be published and on a timely basis. We learn from our mistakes when we know what they are. I encourage you to suggest the last time that ASCMC was this self-flagellating.

    3) Neal, Drew, and Jessica did phenomenal work as Presidential Advisors, work that almost no one ever saw or no one was there to appreciate, and I would defend them earning that $100 stipend to my death.

    4) Everyone criticizes Bridges as a venue, and it understandably has fairly major flaws compared to places like other mid-size LA concert venues, but if you want to have a “major act” on campus (and I guess that’s a debatable “if”), there is no other practical option. We examined every possible venue for every possible type of concert, and we could not find a practical option. The reality is that at no other location do people have the proper incentives to pay for tickets or does there exist protection from it being shut down early by a noise complaint. I don’t believe that enough people would pay a high enough ticket prices to see something on Green Beach, especially when people can see any event from the second floor of Green or frankly, the roofs of other dorms. While the Scripps Garage showed some success with the White Party, I don’t think you could get enough members of the 5C Community and (arguably more importantly from a financial sense) the general public to pay in the $20-$40 range for tickets for a “major” act there.

    5) I would very very very much like to know what was meant by the line “[Jessica has] already made a sham out of the appointment process.”

    6) I think an idea suggested by Dean Huang at a Board of Trustees meeting this year that the school create an entirely separate “Programming Board” for major events that would work with the Dean of Students office is a great one, and I would like to see it takeover the implicit/expected responsibility for major concerts from ASCMC.

    Thank you for reading this,
    Chris Jones
    ASCMC Vice President 2010-2011

    • I’d like to reiterate Chris’ message that both he and I take full responsibility for having chosen LMFAO as the “big act” of the year and the results that followed. It was a decision that was made by us long before elections occurred and the new Executive Board took office.

      Jessica and the new Board have worked unbelievably hard to promote the concert, and I’m personally sorry to them that their first few weeks as ASCMC Board members have been made so tough by the undeserved criticisms that have come their way and should have instead gone solely to Chris and me. They deserve a fresh start and a clean slate, because they are a talented, passionate group of people that had nothing to do with choosing to bring LMFAO to campus, and everything to do with trying to make it as much of a success as possible, nonetheless. To blame the right people, you can usually find me writing thesis, or commiserating with other seniors about writing thesis, in Poppa. You may luck out and find Chris LTA’ing there at the same time. If Chris’ mailbox is too full of letters already, or even if it’s not, my box is #929, or try [email protected] (I recommend [email protected]).

      In choosing an artist, the feedback from the student opinion surveys were greatly considered, and we certainly tried to find an artist/group that would appeal to a large number of students. As we searched, though, it seemed to Chris and me that if there was to be a big concert at CMC this year, given the restraints of costs and availability, then the most responsible choice left was LMFAO. The cost of an act is one of the reasons why CMC has seen more hip hop/rap groups perform in the past than artists from other genres. LMFAO wasn’t chosen because Chris and I wanted love hip hop, or because we wanted to keep the L’s going (Ludacris, Lupe, LMFAO, although count me incredibly impressed if Lady GaGa comes next year and incredibly surprised if it’s Lil Wayne/Lil Bow Wow/Lil Kim/Lil Romeo–are the last 3 still making music?). As a genre, it’s cheaper to bring a hip hop or rap act of one or two people, as opposed to a multi-membered group or even solo performer that has a live band instead of a deejay behind them. The lower the total cost of the act, the lower the average ticket prices, and the more likely (in theory, clearly) that the tickets can be sold. Availability also affected who could perform at our school. Some of our earliest picks weren’t touring at all or weren’t touring near California during dates that worked with the school calendar. One group seemed to be “very CMC,” but their longstanding contract to play at a music festival also doesn’t allow them to play at any other location within a certain distance of that festival.

      In order to follow privacy and confidentiality agreements, not diminish CMC’s negotiation power with this act and with possible future performers, as well as not piss off LMFAO and prevent more public tickets from being sold, it wasn’t possible to share our entire thought process so publicly before the concert occurred. I know that many students were surprised, disappointed, or just confused with the choice of bringing LMFAO, and I hope this has helped clear some of that up, even if the event has already passed.

      Perhaps a “big act” concert shouldn’t have happened at all this year because we couldn’t find the perfect artist. Perhaps instead of ASCMC sending out surveys to only CMC students, then sending a final, “this is the artist” e-mail, ASCMC should poll the public somehow before choosing the artist, since a large part of the loss from the concert resulted from low public ticket sales. As long as negotiations aren’t jeopardized by it, perhaps students can be polled about the very serious, final contenders, and if there’s not enough interest in any of them, then a concert shouldn’t happen. These are all things to consider for the future. I sincerely apologize that such things weren’t done this time around.

      Finally, to address a statement below that tickets weren’t released to the public until three days before the concert, I’m curious to hear where this is coming from. Tickets were available on Ticketmaster.com starting March 7th and also started selling at Bridges to the public on that same day (students from the 5Cs could buy tickets exclusively for a week prior to March 7th). The concert was not until April 2nd.This information was on all the promotional materials that were made. This was, by no means, a private show.

      Sincerely,

      Tammy

    • I just want to echo Dean Huang’s suggestion of a programming board as a great one. I think at times ASCMC has to be all things to all people and that’s not a realistic role to fill for any student government. On the other hand, providing support for clubs, trips, and throwing great parties seems to be something at which student leadership can excel. Why not let Nauls and the rest of DoS bring big acts to campus with the student input necessary?

      • You cant be serious. Give Jim Nauls and DoS the responsibility to throw concerts? Tricycle race man, tricycle race.

      • You cant be serious. Give Jim Nauls and DoS the responsibility to throw concerts? Tricycle race man, tricycle race.

      • Jim Nauls already plans concerts and big events. He, with the other 5C versions of him, brought less successful acts like Gym Class Heroes (if you thought LMFAO didn’t sell out, Gym Class Heroes was nearly empty), and more successful ones like John Legend and Lewis Black. But he doesn’t always have an accurate gauge of what would be popular at CMC or with the public, so it would be nice if he had a group of students dedicated to helping to bring CMC-worthy acts. Aziz Ansari is hilarious, but his tickets aren’t doing so hot with the public, either.

  10. I’ve got to say with all of the griping going on here anonymously, I’m disappointed. I agree with much of the substance of it — ASCMC, like other third-world governments, is run for its members, not we the student body. But if you are so disappointed in what is going on, run for office, institute some reforms, and actually do something about it. In other words, man up. Anyone can comment anonymously.

  11. The backstory of all the politics being discussed here seems detailed and extensive, and I’m not here to take sides. I would, however, like to clarify what I believe to be a misleading article. The opening point that “barely 40% of tickets designated for general admission were sold” insinuates that the general public was not interested in seeing LMFAO, and that the administration, therefore, was to blame for making a poor artist selection. However, where the administration failed was NOT in their artist selection, but rather in their lack of communication and promotion, and now in their lack of full disclosure. While it’s true that 60% of the tickets “for general admission” went unsold, the reason they went unsold is because they were not released to the actual PUBLIC until THREE days before the event! The fact that even 40% of these tickets were sold at such short notice is impressive, and speaks to LMFAO’s draw. I am not a student at CMC, but I would have loved to go to see LMFAO in concert. This was the group’s first performance in LA this year, and had ASCMC opened the event to the general public before their last-ditch panic three days before the show, I am sure that the $25,000 “loss” (READ: subsidy) would have been avoided. If ASCMC hadn’t attempted to keep the event a “Private Show,” they could have even made a profit off of the night.

    • I’m doing to have to disagree with this. I received weekly emails and facebook message about tickets. ASCMC was (understandably) begging people to buy tickets. its simple: LMFAO sucks balls.

  12. DON’T BRING A DANCE PARTY/RAVE GROUP TO AN AUDITORIUM THAT DOESNT HAVE SPACE TO DANCE.

    Who the heck wants to go see LMFAO if there is no space to actually get rowdy. That’s kind of what they’re all about.

  13. hahahhahahhahahhahahhahahhahahhahah this is hillarious you are all so funny to read about, btw ascmc could you please do a little research next year on what is good..lmfao would have been solid like 5 years ago. and props to cjones

  14. hahahhahahhahahhahahhahahhahahhahah this is hillarious you are all so funny to read about, btw ascmc could you please do a little research next year on what is good..lmfao would have been solid like 5 years ago. and props to cjones

  15. Honestly, bringing LMFAO? is this for real. next time get me bruce, joel. hell ill even take the reformed Yusaf Islam. i wana see people getting down to some tunes. kc and the sunshine band is not dead, they are very much alive!

Comments are closed.