I wonder if conservatories are starting to put codes of conduct regulating this with their faculty members? Or if it is such an expected part of the business that teachers would revolt and move to less ethical shops? Certainly, in days gone by, famous teachers (often with even more famous students) did quite well every time the kid traded up.
[And just so everyone knows, I am not putting any v.com member in the category of kickback-solicitor.]
Tweet
I think it was wise of Two-Set not to mention any names, even though they have probably heard who some of the people involved in this are or were. Making specific accusations has gotten some people in trouble in the past.
https://dailynorthwestern.com/2011/01/16/campus/academic/local-violin-maker-accuses-nu-profs-of-kickback-scheme/
I really hope not too many young students take this at face value. While I'm sure the guys aren't making these stories up, giving them prominent unqualified publicity in this way smacks of the kind of alarmist rumour-mongering that results in paranoia and QAnon-style conspiracy theories. Call me naive but I don't believe many violin teachers are into mafia-style extortion and exploitation of their students.
Violin dealers, on the other hand...
Do some teachers take commissions? Probably. Do some shops offer commissions? Probably. But many shops have an explicit written policy that they do NOT offer teacher commissions. So does it occur commonly? Almost certainly not.
Some pros (many of whom probably teach as well) deal on the side. In that capacity, I would expect them to take a commission, but in that case it should be clear that they are acting in their dealing capacity.
What's lacking in Two-set's presentation is any sense of proportion. Yes, the danger exists but without any actual evidence in support I suspect the risk is too low to worry us unduly, particularly when there's little or nothing we can do about it.
I may be showing my ignorance here but had "commissions" really been distributed historically that were more than the instrument's price or value? Or dealers taking a "cut" (more like a pound of flesh, looks like) of the inflated price too? For a "reasonable" 10% type of commission, that is a lot of unaccounted-for excess in the 2-10x number. Does anyone remember when [a federal agency] came down HARD on [a particular professional association] on [things related to pricing] - how did that become such a big deal (think instrument prices and remove one or two or more zeroes from the immediate left of the decimal point) over this?
Per David's post, I was immediately wondering when I saw the TwoSet video, whether they might tackle the much thornier issue of sexual harassment in its various forms in the teaching profession.
Teachers are neither sinners nor saints by virtue of them becoming teachers, even if teaching is noble.
An example in the U.S. are pharmaceutical kickbacks to physicians. That wasn't always regulated until the past decade. Today, the feds require doctors to publicly disclose gifts from drug companies, even if it's just a $10 coffee mug. They can still take gifts, but they have to disclose them. There are obvious reasons for feds coming down on this.
TwoSet raises a point about how it's really about the trust between a teacher and student being violated. Some teachers don't disclose that they are receiving commissions. They also mention teachers retaliating against a student when he/she didn't purchase a violin from a shop that the teacher had a deal with.
Even if some teachers provide a beneficial service, the incentives are still there. For example, in school admissions (which are not blind auditions), it's possible a teacher under financial stress will prefer wealthier students whom they can convince to buy expensive violins, and take them over poorer students of the same talent who cannot afford to buy a new violin during school. It's easy to see based on their financial aid applications or scholarship requests, or googling what their parents do.
I didn't mean the pharma example (didn't know it, thanks for the education!) but something else slightly closer to interests of people on this forum. I had an exchange on another forum pointing out how an extreme reading of [the case language] could be carried *much* too far, so as to prevent growth and development in the profession that was being discussed, and thus I personally was going to set my own behavior boundaries. (I'm being vague on purpose.)
I've been in the fiddle trade for quite a long time. I have been offered "commissions", and have also been solicited. Sometimes, a student would want to try a violin, and I would decline, because I knew who the teacher was, and already knew that nothing could possibly come of it (other than my shipping and insurance expenses, along with the instrument being down-played or trashed by the teacher), because I don't pay teacher commissions.
My first awareness of the practice came when I was a rather serious violin student. My parents bought me a pretty expensive violin. The dealer said, "Oh, you're a student of so-and-so? You get a discount". My immediate reaction was, "Oh, what a swell guy, furnishing a discount to students of this coveted teacher".
Later, I came to be employed in this same violin shop, and learned that teacher commissions (kickbacks?) were built into the pricing, and that the reason I qualified for a discount was that my teacher did not accept these commissions, instructing instead that the commission be taken off the price of the fiddle.
I came to admire that teacher much more after learning that. Not everything needs to be based on money-grubbing, and I continue to hope that there will people who aspire to "higher purposes".
That told me that the shop participates in commissions, but is that because I'm a teacher or because commissions are common in sales? It would be almost like buying a car at the local dealership, you expect that your salesperson has incentives, but your driving instructor isn't involved in that. Or when my real estate agent recommends an attorney or inspector, or my doctor recommends a specialist, or preferred social media influencer recommends a product, how do I know if a referral fee is involved in that or how it affects the recommendation? I don't, so I pretty much have to do independent research as a consumer and teach students to do the same. (Well, I assume that the blogger or YouTuber is compensated, unless they say otherwise, and perhaps the first two are more regulated but I'm not familiar.)
Steve, doesn't it take two to tango?
The practice started well before my time, so I don't have any personal experience with which side should bear the bulk of the blame.
What I am fairly certain of is that well-positioned teachers can exert a major influence over a student's future opportunities, and pretty much make or break their career, if they wish. Dealers, not so much.
Not quite the same sleaze as the hidden commissions on makers living and dead, but lots of potential for conflict of interest. Some makers, of course, use this as a helpful form of marketing.
Another similar second-hand tale (from a luthier about a famous violinist in our town) said that this one person had a long Strad model and LOVED it. Which is kind of unusual, if critics are to be believed. Anyway, there was a local maker who made the player an decent copy of it, which was probably useful for bad-weather gigs. And wouldn't you know, there ended up being quite a number of this person's students urged to get the same thing from him. Apparently, this maker uses good instruments owned by teachers as models (which helps the rest of his business, to be sure), and somehow orders follow from students who are urged to sound just like their teachers.
Now, unless this teacher were being paid directly and not just in the form of a discounted copy for personal use, there is no obvious crime. But it does illustrate how power can shift to one side or another of all these transactions. You've got three parties at work, and the students are the ones with the least information.
btw, my favourite old (1810) violin is loosely based on the "long Strad" design and I gather shares some of its sonic characteristics. I love the sound it makes although it probably wouldn't suit a virtuoso with very different requirements and priorities.
Students purchasing at the high end -- i.e. who are buying five or six-figure antiques -- are in a different category, obviously, but how many teachers routinely deal with such purchases?
When I was a high schooler, my teacher helped me search for both a violin and a bow -- especially the bow, which I eventually bought from his recommended maker, with whom he helped negotiate a discount. (I purchased a Douglas Raguse.)
After that when I recommended a dealer to a student I always told the dealer that I did not accept commissions and I would not recommend them to a student unless they gave any "discount" to the student.
I remember one incident in particular. A minor dealer sold a $200 violin bow to a student and wanted to give me $20. I refused but he later sent me a $20 bill in a letter. I gave the $20 to the student and never recommended this particular dealer to any other student.
How common was this at the places you taught, and do you think a faculty code of conduct to prevent it would have any teeth?
It's in the institutional setting where the stakes are higher. Recall the thread about advanced students needing a $10,000+ violin. At the conservatory level, there's a higher chance students will be shopping for an instrument in the five- or six figure range. The fact that the earnings can be small doesn't mean that a student's education won't be disrupted if they get on the teacher's bad side. Students choose a school because they are accepted by a particular teacher and they can't easily switch studios. Degrees and careers can be affected.
Even if $1,000 is pocket change to an established professor, it is a lot of money to be earning off of their student who on average will be making less than $25,000 out of college (pre-tax), plus student loans.
I called the store to schedule appointment. They asked about our budget so I told them. Upon arrival, we were walked into a room with about a dozen violins layed on a table all within our price range. The teacher was already there and after a brief chat started playing the violins for us in order starting from the least expensive. The ones my daughter liked, she put aside and had her play them herself. Then we proceeded with the approved few until my daughter set her mind on one of them. During all that time, the teacher was very helpful and not pushy at all. It seemed to me that she was genuinely interested to help us find the best sounding violin in our price range that my daughter would like and enjoy playing for years to come. They both agreed to like a violin which wasn't the most expensive.
The same procedure repeated with bows.
After we were done, I went to pay and accidentally overhead that the teacher was getting a commission.
Last thing worth mentioning is that I've checked before hand the online prices of the different student outfits, and I ended up paying the same price stated on the store's website which matched the labels attached on the items we purchased at the physical store.
Here's my perspective on this.
First, I as a parent was offered a professional help in choosing a violin for my child. Very valuable service in my opinion worthy of being financially rewarded. Second, the store was able to make a sale helping them stay in business while also being able to employ people. Third, a teacher gets financially rewarded for an excellent service.
It looks to me that in this particular case everyone got something out of the transaction.
However, I understand how things can get out of control when it comes to instruments worth tens of thousands of dollars and more. We're all humans, and greed is in our nature.
One thing I noticed from your post is that the teacher recommended only one shop, and that this shop just happens to pay teacher commissions. But that might just be coincidence.
Ted's story has a heartwarming glow, but as David pointed out, in the end his choices of new violins for his daughter were limited by having been directed to a particular shop. You can argue that the outcome was good and everyone's happy, but the conflict of interest should be as clear as crystal too.
I'm glad you're happy with the result, but you also don't know whether you might have been happier had you checked out all the local stores and taken the best out of everything. I'm also concerned that it sounds like you went into the shop and simply bought something without having taken multiple violins home on trial.
For instruments below $2000, it's one thing to talk about commissions. After all, whether it's 10% of the sale price of a $1500 outfit, or paying a teacher for the lesson time it takes to pick one, it kind of all washes out anyway.
For bows and instruments in the $X0,000 range, such things, IMO have to be disclosed up front to the student, if they do exist. While I think Brett and Eddy could have used more nuance, having it be something that potential kids of upper-middle-class and wealthy parents are at least aware of is, I think, valuable. This is not to say you should throw the baby out with the bathwater and only buy from instrument makers who aren't in your city to avoid potential commissions (I did, but it's coincidental), but maybe it will give people the confidence to at least ask.
As to your claim that "For instruments below $2000, it's one thing to talk about commissions. After all, whether it's 10% of the sale price of a $1500 outfit, or paying a teacher for the lesson time it takes to pick one, it kind of all washes out anyway",
I will assert that it doesn't. Students will usually assume that when they or their parents hire a teacher, it is implicit that the teacher will always be acting in the student's best interest. Teachers can, and do sometimes have other priorities.
A ten percent commission on a student's purchase of even a $1500 outfit is enough to buy a teacher a nice restaurant dinner (at least around where I live), and who doesn't enjoy that once in a while?
When I had just started making cases and was in my early 20s (with still a lot to learn), I still had contact with my former violin teacher who really had a lot of students. So one day I showed her my cases in the hopes that she might help me sell them. I offered her a commission, to which she replied, oh no, give the students a discount instead. I never offered a commission to a teacher again, recognizing the moral value of her stance.
The second time was when I helping an elderly retired string teacher with her finances, since she was a friend of the family. I kept seeing small checks coming in from a violin shop, even though she was no longer teaching. It turns out that the violin shop was (still) sending her (unsolicited) monetary thank-yous when a former student upgraded their instrument or bow.
So there are many facets to this issue.
Since most of my students were beginners I directed them for their rentals to the shop I dealt with for my own purchases and I went with them to help select the specific instrument and bow I thought would serve them best. I never charged the students for my time - in fact I usually drove student and parent (even paying the bridge toll). I felt getting their hands on the best possible instrument at the best price would give ME the best chance for successful teaching and them the best chance for a good and lasting experience.
Thinking about this only now, however, I wonder if consecutive and subsequent discounts the dealer gave me on my own purchases over the years (when I requested them) might have been (at least partially) the result of this practice.
When I lived in London I regularly went with students and parents to a number of very well known and established London violin dealers. I told the parents up-front that I would be receiving a commission of 15% from the dealer for my time and expertise. Generally the parents, the student and I would go in their chauffeur driven car. The chauffeur (and in one case, the bodyguard as well) would wait outside till we were done. Most appointments would last around four hours. I would help them find the best sounding instrument that suited them. This would result in one or more violins being taken on approval.
All parties knew in advance what was happening. All parties (including the IRD) were happy with the arrangement. These familys were very wealthy, time poor, and needed someone they trusted to guide them though the process. I do not think there is a one-size fits all to the idea of commissions.
Cheers Carlo
Still, one necessary (if not totally sufficient) element here was full disclosure. Most teachers have never bothered to do that, and extra points to Carlo for making that a part of the deal.
Violinist.com is made possible by...
Juilliard Starling-DeLay Symposium on Violin Studies
Dimitri Musafia, Master Maker of Violin and Viola Cases
Violinist.com Business Directory
Violinist.com Guide to Online Learning
Johnson String Instrument and Carriage House Violins
Discover the best of Violinist.com in these collections of editor Laurie Niles' exclusive interviews.
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 1, with introduction by Hilary Hahn
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 2, with introduction by Rachel Barton Pine