Free days keep the revenue and remove the barrier

The argument

Proponents of this position argue that the dispute rests on a false choice. The case for charging is about revenue and independence; the case for free entry is about who gets through the door. These are different claims about different things, and a scheme that charges on most days and admits everyone free on some days addresses both. The museum retains an income it controls, and the person for whom a fee is prohibitive has a reliable day on which to come. The argument is that each side's strongest point survives the compromise while its weakest is given up. Those who want free entry are mainly concerned with the visitor who cannot pay, not with the visitor who can; a free day serves the first without subsidising the second. Those who want a charge are mainly concerned with keeping a revenue stream and avoiding total dependence on grants; a charge on most days keeps both. Proponents add that a fixed, well publicised free day is more useful to the people it is for than a general concession scheme, since it requires no one to establish eligibility, prove a circumstance or ask for anything at a desk. Holders of the view acknowledge the obvious costs and argue that they are the lesser ones. Free days concentrate attendance, which means crowding on those days and a different kind of visit, and some people cannot choose which day they are free. They argue that this is a genuine loss and a smaller one than either alternative imposes, and that the pattern can be tuned, whether by more than one free day, free late openings or free afternoons, according to what a particular collection and its public can bear.

Premises

Counter-arguments

Critics on both sides argue that the compromise takes the costs of each. Those who favour free entry note that a free day tells people they are welcome on one day and chargeable on the others, and that the crowding it produces makes the visit worse for exactly the people who have no alternative day. Those who favour charging note that a free day forfeits revenue on days likely to be busy while retaining the whole administrative apparatus of ticketing. Others add that people with inflexible work and care obligations cannot choose their day, so the barrier is removed only for some.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P2] The arrangement preserves both concerns only partially, forfeiting revenue on days likely to be busy while still telling some visitors they are welcome on one day rather than any day. [Rejecting P3] Needing no eligibility check is an advantage lost again if the free day is crowded enough to make the visit markedly worse for those with no alternative. [Rejecting C] Those with inflexible work or care obligations cannot choose their day, so the barrier is removed for a subset rather than answered generally.