Arts & International Affairs: Volume 2, Number 2 | Page 162

Although we may assume that free admission levels the field by allowing
anyone to participate in the arts, the question remains whether or not this
strategy unfairly limits the economic potential of our artistic endeavours.
I believe low or no cost admission does not stymie this potential because
producing arts creates value from its social relevancy that should have
primacy in any consideration of pricing.
Cultural organizations’ experimentation with alternative strategies, such as
dynamic pricing using sophisticated analytics to determine demand, bring
opportunities for income growth by reducing unused capacity. However, the
instability in dynamic pricing could generate distrust among consumers. But
if used properly, dynamic pricing could translate to better incomes and more
jobs for artists; this result depends on re-investing revenue into riskier art,
which would ideally subsidize productions in poor economic climates. Yes,
dynamic pricing could even allow for free admission to select programming
billed as special opportunities; such marketing would increase value while
decreasing price.
Great programming and creative promotion will help resolve conflicts
over pricing by shifting focus from fixed sums to creating value and social
relevance through art.
161