The English Press Club contacted the CoStAA to understand their view on the statements made by the coordinator of the Department of Live Events (DLE), Aarchi Singh Thakur, prior to the heated discussion at this year’s APOGEE Review Meet (ARM), and the verdict released by the Election Commission (EC). 

Hitansh Tanna, the CoStAAn of the Department of Sponsorship & Marketing (Sponz), began by dismissing the allegations as baseless and attributed them to ‘DLE’s ego’. Hitansh further explained that the reason why the CoStAA and the Union Council (UC) refrained from engaging in a conflict with DLE during the ARM, was due to their focus on what they deemed as ‘more important motions’, such as removing the Department of Visual Media (DVM) from probation. Additionally, they sought to prevent the elongation of the ARM, which previously led to club coordinators leaving the session and subsequent delays in establishing the quorum during voting. 

Dharun Bail, the CoStAAn of the Department of Controls, stated that they tried to reason with DLE as much as they could within their constraints, and provided ample opportunities to discuss their proposals. Regarding DLE’s allegations of barring them from cross-pitching for the stand-up comedy event N2O, Dharun clarified that they were allowed to pitch, but their quote came in too late and was ultimately deemed unsubstantial. He added that DLE’s quote was smaller by INR 20,000, not INR 50,000 as Aarchi claimed. Further, upon verification by the artist managers themselves, they claimed that the agency had not received any quote other than the one proposed by the Hindi Activities Society (HAS). Consequently, they opted to work with HAS, citing their responsiveness and satisfactory performance.

Dharun elaborated that DLE had pitched a quote of INR 37.5 lakh and later pitched a combined quote for both the artist and production aspects, encompassing all speakers, stages, and equipment for the event. This quote remained the same even when the sponsors previously included in the quote backed out, which the CoStAA deemed suspicious. Moreover, he asserted that DLE imposed false deadlines on the CoStAA, by threatening to revoke the deal if it was not signed at arbitrary times, such as 4 AM or 5 PM. He explained that the agreement remained valid until the end of APOGEE, indicating that the agency did not enforce such deadlines but was solely instigated by DLE to pressure the CoStAA.  He also shared that DLE even resorted to chasing Sarthak outside his exam room to force him to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). ‘This is clearly an act of bad faith and you can’t operate like that for a fest,’ commented Dharun. 

Hitansh explained that DLE emailed Mohit Chauhan’s manager without their knowledge, falsely claiming that their agency was the sole contender for a deal. This led to two agency members travelling from Chandigarh to speak with the registrar. However, the registrar set a strict deadline for the agency to prove their MoU’s validity, threatening nullification if not met. When the validity could not be proved, the CoStAA signed a different agency they had scouted. Abhinav Lamba, the General Secretary, added that the CoStAA consequently confirmed a deal with Sandeep Jamwal’s agency and assigned signings to DLE, starting with the Taalwinder show. However, after two unsuccessful signing attempts, where only 323 signings were secured, the CoStAA involved Embryo in the process, as they had brought in the three opening artists for the Taalwinder show — Raga, Bharg, and Fotty Seven. The CoStAA asserted that they pleaded with the SSMS to arrange a grub on the day of the signings. They assigned DLE to the SR mess, anticipating their strong performance. However, they were later informed by Embryo that DLE members never showed up for the signings.

The CoStAA alleged that one of DLE’s juniors sent screenshots of the DVM signings portal to a person in the Goa campus, which was supposed to be exclusive for the Pilani BITSians. It was then circulated among the artists’ managers who contacted the CoStAA to confirm the same. It became a question of reliability for them as the agencies were under the impression that this would be a non-ticketed event, and the confidentiality breach of further sensitive information. Abhinav confirmed that Aarchi had apologised for the same in the Students’ Union (SU) room. He also explained that the shows were ideally supposed to be non-ticketed events but the SU charged the students to cover the cost of the fest. He clarified that the targeted revenue for the fest was INR 1.98 crores but DLE’s mistake cost them INR 27–28 lakhs as they could not charge for the Mohit Chauhan show. 

Dharun shared his grievances about DLE’s Joint Coordinator, Raaghav Kashyap, who threatened them on multiple occasions and allegedly vandalised the windows of the room given to the Department of Art, Design, and Publicity. Three CoStAAns and multiple others witnessed this. Abhinav also produced pictures as evidence of this.

Dharun claimed that the element sheet was forwarded to Aarchi, to ensure her considerations were duly noted and all her input was relayed to the agency. Dharun clarified that the interruption in sound during the show was not due to technical malfunctions but rather caused by overcrowding near the stage. Concerning the allegations regarding QR code scanning for the VIP box, with claims that the system was set up to exclude DLE, Abhinav and Dharun responded by saying that their intention was not to exclude them, but to ensure smooth entry for all attendees. It was implemented as per Prof. Navin Singh’s instructions to prevent overcrowding.  

The CoStAA mentioned that the EC rushed to send out a mail regarding the violations without consulting them, which they found unfair. Hitansh called it a desperate measure by the EC to save their faces out of public pressure. They addressed the EC’s concerns during a two-hour discussion before proceeding with the ARM. They presented evidence to take a stance against the points in the EC’s mail, which they later agreed were valid refutations.

The CoStAA then made its stance on fostering collaborations with departments like DLE and other clubs in future fests clear. While acknowledging challenges with DLE, they emphasised that if they themselves were the problem, every club coordinator would have had issues with them. They asserted that DLE’s actions caused most of the problems, rather than their management. They claimed that despite difficulties, the CoStAA extended sympathy and addressed DLE’s concerns, maintained communication and allocated a room in FD-1 during the fest out of good faith. 

Dharun explained that they addressed all of Aarchi’s concerns and even incorporated additional elements to ensure no compromise in quality. He claimed that the main issue arose when she refused to agree to their proposed solutions for her concerns. He clarified that all tenders and MoUs were vetted through the Corroboration and Review Committee (CRC). Initially, only the President’s and CRC’s signatures were required, but Aarchi’s vendor insisted on her signature too. However, after explaining the procedures to the vendor, they agreed to sign the MoU. He elucidated the established procedures outlined in the charter, including restrictions on club coordinators signing contracts. 

When asked about the CoStAA’s thoughts on DLE’s withdrawal from the fest, Tanna promptly replied, ‘the L in DLE does not stand for logic,’ and specifically requested that his words be quoted. Dharun stated that this was not a problem with DLE overall, but rather specifically an issue with the APOGEE coordinator and joint coordinator. In parting they claimed to have no animosity towards DLE, and that they respected their work. On the question of DLE or any other club handling signings in the future, Hitansh stated that the decision lies in the next CoStAA’s hands and that they trust and respect their juniors with the same.