Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: That’s crazy | |
| Last Edit: writerkev 09:45 pm EDT 06/20/22 | |
| Posted by: writerkev 09:42 pm EDT 06/20/22 | |
| In reply to: re: That’s crazy - ryhog 08:18 pm EDT 06/20/22 | |
|
|
|
| Jeremy is simply quoting dramedy in the post immediately preceding his when he says “rules of recoupment.” I take it to mean when dramedy looked at the total revenue over the course of Lehman Trilogy’s run, he estimated that it certainly should have recouped. When Broadway Tony said it returned only 70% (unbelievable as that is and incorrect or not), that’s what led dramedy to say he questions his assumptions of profitability—or “rules of recoupment”—during the pandemic economy. |
|
| reply to this message |
| You Are Misinterpreting My Post: I Merely Was Quoting a Comment from BWW -- I Was NOT Expressing My Own Opinion | |
| Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 08:08 am EDT 06/21/22 | |
| In reply to: re: That’s crazy - writerkev 09:42 pm EDT 06/20/22 | |
|
|
|
| The comment on BWW was germane to the discussion so I posted it. I have no "inside" information one way or the other about whether or not The Lehman Trilogy recouped. | |
| reply to this message |
| re: You Are Misinterpreting My Post: I Merely Was Quoting a Comment from BWW -- I Was NOT Expressing My Own Opinion | |
| Posted by: writerkev 09:25 am EDT 06/21/22 | |
| In reply to: You Are Misinterpreting My Post: I Merely Was Quoting a Comment from BWW -- I Was NOT Expressing My Own Opinion - BroadwayTonyJ 08:08 am EDT 06/21/22 | |
|
|
|
| Your opinion of your own statement is irrelevant to the weird twisting around the phrase "rules of recoupment" that happened in this thread. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| THE LEHMAN TRILOGY -- Recouped or Did Not Recoup? | |
| Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 10:16 am EDT 06/21/22 | |
| In reply to: re: You Are Misinterpreting My Post: I Merely Was Quoting a Comment from BWW -- I Was NOT Expressing My Own Opinion - writerkev 09:25 am EDT 06/21/22 | |
|
|
|
| The only person twisting the phrase "rules of recoupment" is jgerard who seems obsessed with Drabinsky. As ryhog points out, Drabinsky is irrelevant to this discussion. The Lehman Trilogy's capitalization was $5.75 million. According to dramedy the show's total 16-week gross-gross is $13.5 million. We need at least two more pieces of information in order to make an intelligent guess at recoupment, i.e., #1 -- the amount of covid insurance money received by the production and #2 -- the show's weekly running cost. Does anyone have that information? The BWW poster's comment is a piece of the puzzle. As such, it's just as relevant to this discussion as the speculation on the part of dramedy and ryhog that the show must have recouped. Here's another question: since the National Theatre was the lead producer, is this show even considered a commercial production or would it be a non-profit one? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: THE LEHMAN TRILOGY -- Recouped or Did Not Recoup? | |
| Posted by: ryhog 02:18 pm EDT 06/21/22 | |
| In reply to: THE LEHMAN TRILOGY -- Recouped or Did Not Recoup? - BroadwayTonyJ 10:16 am EDT 06/21/22 | |
|
|
|
| It was a commercial production. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That’s crazy | |
| Posted by: ryhog 10:24 pm EDT 06/20/22 | |
| In reply to: re: That’s crazy - writerkev 09:42 pm EDT 06/20/22 | |
|
|
|
| I realize Dramedy used the expression first, but I don't understand what either of them is talking about. The only obligation to disclose (and pay) anything is between the parties to the deal. I can't fathom what's wrong with a producer having their press agent announce recoupment: it's something to be proud of, and also something that is good PR for both producer and production. (To answer the other question, not announcing may just be a personal preference, or not as important to some, just as throwing away money on full page color Sunday ads in the Times is not everybody's idea of a smart move. Maybe some have good reasons, maybe some don't.) But I don't know what anyone can add to the discussion by citing to what a known fraudster may or may not have done almost 30 years ago. Nothing in a press release has anything to do with a producer's obligations to investors. I'd just like to see clear discussion of relevant matters. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That’s crazy | |
| Posted by: jgerard 01:03 pm EDT 06/21/22 | |
| In reply to: re: That’s crazy - ryhog 10:24 pm EDT 06/20/22 | |
|
|
|
| Well, press releases are made to impress credulous investors and industry reporters alike. They may not have anything to do with legal obligation, but they have everything to do with image. Cf Scott Rudin's weekly press releases, dutifully regurgitated in theater columns, about all the records Mockingbird was breaking, no matter how meaningless. Or, further back, Cameron Mackintosh's pronouncements re Miss Saigon's advance and SRO status, which proved to be a manipulation Alex Witchel smartly revealed in the Times. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That’s crazy | |
| Last Edit: writerkev 05:28 am EDT 06/21/22 | |
| Posted by: writerkev 05:20 am EDT 06/21/22 | |
| In reply to: re: That’s crazy - ryhog 10:24 pm EDT 06/20/22 | |
|
|
|
| Neither of them are talking about any of that when they use the words “rules of recoupment.” It’s not about any literal rules or obligations about announcing in the press. Dramedy simply used it to refer to guidelines to assume profitability, number of weeks above certain revenue. You’re reading way too much into a simple phrase. There’s nothing to be confused about. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.024154 seconds.