View Full Version : Other Texas girls... Have your clubs suffered since Jan 1?
Paris
01-12-2008, 08:31 PM
I work for an agency that books Dallas/ Ft Worth, Austin, SA and Houston (and surrounding areas).
We don't have to pay the 'pole tax' because we don't have liquor licenses. And we have been very, very busy lately. I turn customers away every week because all the girls are completely booked up.
There is a certain amount of work ethic and self sufficiency that needs to go into being a party dancer vs. a club dancer. Scheduling is very important in the party business, and customers want the girl that they have picked, not a substitute at the last minute because the girl they requested got a better offer (or whatever).
To the OP, if you do have a desire to manage dancers, feel free to PM me. I'd be more than happy to send work your way, Lord knows we've got plenty to go around (not nearly enough dancers working parties in the area)!
Paris
01-12-2008, 08:40 PM
Oh, and about the extra tax thing...
I think the law makers are falling victim to the myth that "strip clubs are money factories" that so much of pop culture is shoving down people's throats.
They think that $5 a head is reasonable if millions are being pumped into the club daily. ::) At least they didn't find a new way to take money directly out of the dancer's pocket via some license or work permit or some such crap that cities try to pull.
You won't hear much in the way of complaints from people about the tax, either. No one is willing to come to the aid of naked women, apparently.
phairestofthemall
01-14-2008, 06:01 AM
As a dancer in Dallas I've been hearing a lot about this- so far I'm glad to say my money isn't hurting, but granted I work at big clubs. Check out this article too:
http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=80&sid=1315082
As mentioned there, it's not the 5 bucks- personally I actually prefer to work at clubs with a relatively high cover- what's maddening is the implication that our profession leads men to commit sex crimes. >:(
At the Lodge mentioned in there they've chosen to eat a lot of the costs themselves; VIP's get it all covered and I think everyone else gets a few bucks, and to my knowledge no drink/food costs have been hiked. And in general elsewhere I've been (and I've been around the block this week to help my friend find a new club) it seems this is prevalent- even dives across town covered a buck of it for their patrons. Whether that's sustainable for small clubs remains to be seen though.
But even if it is, that's another point of contention- does it seem strange to anyone else that the bill even allows a club to pay this tax in lieu of the patron? Imagine if that were true of other taxes- let's say that, to encourage business, a filling station could cover some of your gas or cig taxes, or that the grocery could cover your sales tax, ect. Seeing as how that never happens I'm thinkin it's because it's not allowed, so why is it allowed in this case? I think it's allowed in this case by design- to permit more money to be skimmed off the club, not off the patrons.
I hope we chew them up in the lawsuit, and I'd sure be willing to throw some money towards those costs and/or show up at a rally. But my sign won't say what I'm stripping for, that's irrelevant, rather just 'I don't cause rape!'
austinatalie
01-15-2008, 12:32 AM
Oh I so want to be there. Maybe I'll have to move up my waxing appt and take a little road trip for the night. Any volunteers to let me crash at their place Saturday night?
you could always stay at my place!
PrettyCurlieQ
01-15-2008, 12:25 PM
^I've been talking to a couple of girls about road tripping to Austin to work for a weekend. Amarillo sucks so bad, we wanna go make some money! What Austin clubs are still rockin'?!
SundayMorning
01-15-2008, 04:27 PM
Psst, Susan...Katrine posted this on the 12th! (http://www.stripperweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1360496&postcount=44) ;)
WiseGuy_TX
01-15-2008, 05:23 PM
Have your clubs suffered since Jan 1? - Treasures in Houston raided last Friday night. 12 girls, one manager, one customer reported to be arrested. Other than that, I'm not hearing too many complaints on the sporadically enforced extra $5 fee.
Susan Wayward
01-15-2008, 07:13 PM
Psst, Susan...Katrine posted this on the 12th! (http://www.stripperweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1360496&postcount=44) ;)
deleted for DUH. I thought I looked through the damn thread. Thanks!
tjbrooks
01-24-2008, 02:54 PM
Sorry to intrude, but I should stop lurking.
I'm an economist trying to do research on adult entertainment issues (if only the data were easier to come by). First let me say I oppose the tax. However I do find it very interesting that clubs are responding so differently.
Economists are sure of few things, but one is if you raise the price of the activity, you will get less of it...of course how much less is the interesting question. Tax incidence is the idea that from whom you collect the tax is not the same as who bears the tax. As morgan from texas notes... some of the tax is being born by the club, some by the customer.
The issue of advertising the tax austinnatalie suggests is also interesting. Tax salience is the idea that the more we feel the tax the more it will impact our behavior...advertising it might get a lobbying effort together, but it might also reduce the number of customers!
Finally there are SCs that do not serve alcohol that are not exposed to this tax, I wonder how there business is? As Paris notes it has increased the demand for out call dancers. This could have unintended consequences. It seems one thing clubs can do well is protect the safety of dancers. I imagine out-call dancers have security as well (but it is clearly more expensive then the economies of scale that can be realized in a club), and am not suggesting one is better than the other, but I'm pretty sure the politicians didn't consider the consequences of their actions, they rarely do.
If anyone has any info to share, please email me at brooks.tagg at uwlax.edu I'm always looking for data and info.
Thanks
TJ
miabella
01-24-2008, 04:31 PM
they are exposed to the tax if alcohol is consumed in their buildings-- that is, byob clubs are subject same tax as topless, but without liquor sales to offload the cost onto.
technically, outcall dancing could be affected, if the same outcall locations were used repeatedly and the customers brought their own alcohol-- a de facto 'club location' would be legally established, etc.
i am pretty interested in what kind of economic analyses you plan to do on adult entertainment. can you be more specific?