Precisely -- money that does NOT go to the venue.
[/b]
you're wrong here. remember, to get in, the kids have to pay a cover. while it is true that venues make most of their money on alcohol, there are some shows where enough people will pay that it is completely worthwhile to book an all ages show. i've had certain nights at the warehouse where we drew over 100 underage kids, and at $8 or $10 a pop (more in most places), the venue is keeping a decent amount, more than it would if it were strictly 21+ and the bands drew 18. those 18 people aren't going to drink enough to match 100 paid at the door.
there's a middle ground that can be tread. as a booker, i wouldn't book hardcore or punk shows that barely draw, because neither the door nor the bar will make anything. there's got to be a balance.
i have to side with betty on being "entitled" to see live music. i guess this is because of my leftist/DIY/punk background, and maybe because i remember all the days from when i was 14-20 when i wanted to see a show but couldn't because i was underage -- i missed many legendary jazz/folk/blues musicians who are now dead -- but i think all ages shows, or at least 18+, are extremely important to the health of the music scene. i believe that kids should be encouraged to go to shows, and they shouldn't be left out because they are a certain age.
the argument that an underage person is taking the space of one who can drink is bullshit. many adults don't drink, so should they have to relinquish their spot at a sold-out show because there is someone who can drink waiting outside?
i said it before and i'll say it again -- and this is from dealing directly with these small club owners because i have to -- they just don't want to make the effort to deal with watching underage kids, plain and simple.
