Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum What do you guy's think of these "strip center" music school

There seem to be a lot of these music schools popping up recently. They're private businesses that teach a few instruments, mainly piano, and they're usually found in strip centers of suburban areas.

They all seem to have the same business model, which is an astonishing one, really. All the teachers are contractors, the school schedules the lessons and finds the students, and the school takes fifty percent (or more!) of the cost per lesson.

Now I don't teach piano so I can't say what my perspective would be if I did, but I'm wondering, from a teacher's perspective, why would anyone agree to such terms?

I mean I understand there's costs and overhead, etc, but still, fifty percent? That REALLY seems high. Why would anyone teach there?

For the business owner on the other hand, it seems like a cash cow. No employee costs, healthcare, liabilities, etc to deal with. And with a percentage profit of every lesson, you get 20-40 teachers and that's quite a lot.

I don't know, the whole thing seems vaguely exploitative and kinda sleazy. Anyone agree, or am I off base here?

Many service businesses use the same model, with the same percentage take. A friend is in the nail business. He has 11 stations, keeps an average of ten of them full all the time. He gives the "employees" 50%. That seems to be the norm. Of course, he has to provide the equipment, do the maintenance, the book keeping, pay the taxes, license fees, etc., etc. So his net is no where as ample as many think.

They are called studios... They haven't been popping up recently, I think. They have been around for quite a long time.

They pay for the studio space, instrument and its maintenance, advertise and find students, do all of the contract/paperwork/etc, insure that you are paid regardless of whether or not a student shows up, set up and figure out recitals/competitions, and hire primarily music majors or other students to teach.

It's a good place for growing teachers, but a bad place for students. I'd never work there, but there are those who must.

If the school gives top-notch instruction to its teachers on how to teach, there can be some benefit to a teacher starting out. The teacher gets colleagues to talk to and students.

But, in some cases these places are exploiting teachers and fooling parents into thinking their kids are getting proper instruction.

However, as John says, one could argue that any employee is being exploited in any business. For instance, a cashier and a delivery man may be the two most essential links to creating a good business. But they will get the lowest pay. That's because in this system of capitalism, the person who earns the most is the person who
1) has the most money to start.
2) takes the most risk.
3) takes the most responsibility.
4) has the hardest decisions to make.

Axiom Pro, what is your interest in this matter?

Ok yes you guys have made some good points. I guess I was just surprised that such a business model exists, as I'd never encountered it before. I guess there are other examples, as John said.

So they hire mainly students to teach? Is there typically any over sight as to the quality of teaching that's goin on? The reason I ask is because I'm a little older, took lessons years ago, thought about doing it again, and saw these schools.

Good point Candywoman about employees and business. Hadn't thought of it that way. I guess I'm just wondering why any talented teacher would teach at such a school for a 50 percent cut when they could just teach out of there house for 100 percent.

It seems to be a growing trend. I can see it in service industries per se, maybe, but in professions? Teaching is unregulated just like my present profession. There is expertise involved in teaching, and a teacher should be relying on his own professional judgment as he teaches. What we're seeing at our end is middlemen offering services which they have others do, and raking in the profits. The middleman knows nothing about the service, hires inexperienced people, and imposes policies that are good for money but don't necessarily make sense in terms of quality service. I don't know how that works out in teaching, but I would hope that any training that happens is done by qualified people. A bona fide teacher who knows what he or she is doing should be getting more than 50% for his or her work imho.

For me the important thing is that a professional has expertise and must be free to use his judgment, and he should be paid properly for that. It is not the same as someone standing at the cash register ringing in produce.

Axiompro, do you have personal factual knowledge that fifty percent (or more!) is truly what the schools charge the teachers?

I can't speak for Axiompro, but I know of one music school in the area that charged $29/55 for 30/60 (so $116/220) minute lessons, goes on a monthly basis (meaning some months students only receive three lessons), and pays the teachers 15-20 dollars an hour, depending on how long they have worked for the studio.

Also, this studio only pays the teachers for the lessons they actually teach, so they are not paid on the weeks where they don't have lessons because of holidays/studio being closed.

If the teachers are being paid by the hour, wouldn't they technically be 'employees' and not independent contractors? If they're employees then the school would have costs associated with them, mainly taxes.

We have a local music store that charges a % of what the teachers collect per student as monthly studio rental fee. Each teacher has his/her rates; they'r not set by the store. The store doesn't collect tuition; the teacher does. That then qualifies them to be independent contractors.

We haven't actually addressed this particular question. Here are some reasons which come to mind:

- The teacher doesn't want to set up an independent studio. Perhaps because of other commitments, other job, etc.

- The teacher likes the flexibility and/or convenience of this particular arrangement.

There is a secondary implication in the question, and that is a 50% commission is somehow a bad thing. People with little or no business experience often believe that margins of any sort are somehow usurious. Not withstanding the obvious, that no one in the teaching business is becoming wealthy, the old expression, "Put your money where your mouth is," comes to mind. If you believe that 50% commission is too high, set up a studio operation at 25%. See how that works out for you. One thing I'm sure of, your teachers will love you!

There's something fishy here. If the teachers are truly independent contractors, then the studio can't specify a percentage (because they can't police or control what the independent contractors charge.)

So there are one of two models - either the teacher is a contractor who rents the space, and the rent may well be very high; or the teacher is an employee who takes an hourly wage, in which case $15-20 is probably a small fraction of the total revenue brought in by the school.

As with any business, it succeeds because people are willing to do it. Far too many teachers are in it as a hobby, marking time between college and a salaried job or in addition to a day job that affords them the luxury of teaching for cheap.

Yup, I am teaching for two right now. They students are charged $70 per hour, and I take home $26!! More than half! This is normal and terrible..

That's what I was thinking. If the teachers are teaching regular schedules, then they are de facto employees. Yet the owner doesn't have to cover any costs typically associated with employees, no vacation, taxes, healthcare, etc. It's almost like the owners are getting to have their cake and eat it too.

Very simply, people know how to deal with employment but are inexperienced in matters of self-employment. This situation doesn't just happen in teaching. You take someone who is inexperienced, unsure, and grateful for opportunities or "opportunities" and they may accept something that they shouldn't, and don't fully understand.

That right there is the heart of the matter, i think

You assume too much. My neighbor next door has a lawn service that cuts his lawn every week on the same day, usually on the same hour. I know, because he wakes me up. But the the lawn guy is not an employee of the homeowner, though, but rather is a general contractor. The homeowner does not provide health care, vacations, etc, for the lawn guy just because he mows the lawn on some kind of regular schedule.

Nevertheless, what counts is what the law says, not what you or I think. And in most states here in the US just because a service provided by someone (piano teacher, lawn service, barber, etc) is done on a regular basis does NOT make that person a defacto or any other kind of employee.

There is so much here that is completely the opposite of what I have experienced that I almost do not know where to start.

But here goes anyways.

First, "The middleman knows nothing about the service,"

Facts please? Here are some:

There are two music stores here in town where I live, a medium size city in the south...I have subcontracted to one of the stores for over twelve years as a teacher.
The owners are musicians who gig and teach on a regular basis. The other store is a small guitar store that specializes in rare and antique instruments, and the owner is a well-known musician who has 2 teachers, both well known local musicans.

Second: "Raking in the profits"

News flash: The economy is struggling. Music lessons are not the essential food, clothing and shelter. No one I know is "raking in the profits", especially with rising taxes and insurance.

Third: hires inexperienced people,

Not where I live. Its the opposite, actually. Where I subcontract there are 4 guitar teachers, 2 piano teachers, one wind instrument teacher, one drum teacher, and one vocal coach. All are full-time or near full-time musicians, many with degrees. For example, our wind instrument teacher is a Berkelee grad. In the years I have been working there, there have been one or two inexperienced teachers slip into the program, but they don't last long.

Bottom line, it is a quality operation. The percentage I make is quite a bit better than 50-50, and it works very well for me and the other teachers, which is why the store has a waiting list of qualified teachers who would love to work there. (sorry, love to SUBCONTRACT there).

I am sure it is different elsewhere, that there are "teaching mills" but to tar with the same brush all places that subcontract their music teachers is inaccurate and wrong.

I'll give a more extended answer here. As I mentioned above, I teach at two of them and the rate per hour is $70, and teachers are paid $26. We are not independent contractors, it is an employee job. I think these types of "music schools" are MUCH more popular now than they were about 15 years ago when I was starting out taking lessons myself in a suburban area. Coincidentally, I was thinking just this morning about making a post about them here.

While they do have their merits (a "school" environment, decent facilities with annual recitals, nice waiting area and standard policies, good no-show/cancellation policies for the teachers), they are on the whole pretty rotten establishments because of their exploration of teachers. People here have been mentioning that they pay half to the teachers. I have yet to see this, as the ones I am working at or have interviewed for are more around 1/3rd. And there is no variance in payment proportional to the educaiton of the teacher. (i.e., one of my co-workers has a D.M.A from Eastman, and the other is an undergrad in music ed at a state college, and both get $26 per hour. That PLUS we are required to teach every trial lesson of a new potential student for free - with only about a 60% chance that student will sign up).

Musicians are highly skilled people, and a lot of us have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on education throughout our schooling, not to mention the standard 10,000 hours, and here were are working for a wage that is little more than a desk secretary makes. The most unfair part of it all is that sometimes it is the students (and there are plenty of good students at these places) who suffer. When a teacher is given so little and treated with a lack of seriousness, it can become difficult to care about each and every one of your students as much as they should be cared for, especially if it is the end of a long teaching day. The latter is a perspective I'd like to write an article about, since it's something that might not occur to the parents of these students who are generally naive about this matter. (No fault of their own)

Of course you're wondering why the heck I haven't been long gone from these places (though I soon plan to be) - it's becuase there are absolutely no private students!! I'm convinced that these very schools are starting to eat up the clientele who would normally have - 10 years ago - gone with a private teacher. When I began teaching I advertised like a madman, putting up flyers, talking to elementary school music teachers, spreading word of mouth, joining organizations - nothing. The few calls I got were people who were looking for extreme bargains. Yet as soon as I was hired by these schools (in the very same area), I was flooded with dozens of calls the first week. Unfortunately, with bills to pay, the route to take becomes painfully obvious.

Yes...read my post. It seems that your particular area has it going on a lot better. But more often than not, the majority of rates and systems I have observed (in two major U.S cities, seem much more in alignment with what I describe)

Rocket, I was describing a scenario that does happen, not any one and only scenario. I described it across two professions, my present profession and music teaching. In my own I have worked for organizations that are the equivalent of the music stores like the ones you described - people who are knowledgeable in the field and work well with other professionals. I have also encountered something quite the opposite which is as I described. I have also heard of both scenarios in music teaching. I have no doubt that what you are describing exists, and this is the kind of thing that should flourish. There has been more than one story on PW that suggests the opposite is also out there.