Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: AUGUST WILSON'S "THE PIANO LESSON" TO PLAY THE ETHEL BARRYMORE THEATRE ON BROADWAY | |
| Posted by: ryhog 09:34 am EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: AUGUST WILSON'S "THE PIANO LESSON" TO PLAY THE ETHEL BARRYMORE THEATRE ON BROADWAY - Official_Press_Release 08:49 am EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| one of the worst kept secrets ever, and one of the smartest moves. | |
| reply to this message |
| I wonder how much it cost. | |
| Last Edit: dramedy 11:35 am EDT 07/26/22 | |
| Posted by: dramedy 11:34 am EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: AUGUST WILSON'S "THE PIANO LESSON" TO PLAY THE ETHEL BARRYMORE THEATRE ON BROADWAY - ryhog 09:34 am EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| The audience was offered $500k to move to a different theater to allow McNally play to stay put. I guess the next announcement soon will be woods extending to January. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: I wonder how much it cost. | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 02:02 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: I wonder how much it cost. - dramedy 11:34 am EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Seeing as it wasn't selling well enough to fill the St. James, I'd be surprised if they received anything other than expenses for re-designing the show to fit the smaller Barrymore stage. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Hardly. | |
| Last Edit: ShowGoer 02:35 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| Posted by: ShowGoer 02:33 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: I wonder how much it cost. - Singapore/Fling 02:02 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| "I'd be surprised if they received anything other than expenses for re-designing the show to fit the smaller Barrymore stage" .. and any other expenses of the move itself (possibly including load-in). ...plus obviously any and all expenses incurred with moving from SeatGeek to Telecharge (my strong guess, believe it or not, is that Jujamcyn will have to sign over the service fees collected so far to Telecharge... If you think about it, it wouldn't be fair for Telecharge to be denied that money, since SeatGeek can now collect service fees on the exact same seats they'll be reselling all over again for Woods – that's a form of self-dealing, and since it isn't SeatGeek's fault but Jujamcyn's decision, and since there are now services and costs involved at Telecharge for transferring all the seats to the new theater at the new ticketing company, I'd bet anything that Jujacmyn is on the hook for all those fees so far. Plus, obviously, any tickets that are refunded because of the move (people who don't like their new seats, people who have accessibility issues with the new theater, etc.) Further, one of the articles in the trades said something about the Piano Lesson stars renegotiating their deals due to a smaller theater – if that's true, whether it's more money up front, or now an added cut of the box office take, Jujamcyn would certainly be responsible for those expenses as well. And that's assuming there weren't automatic penalties triggered for kicking them out of the theater in the first place; i.e., booting them before they even had a chance to fall below their 'stop clause'. This will have all been worked out in advance, so none of it should result in legal action – but there's absolutely no way i's as simple as "they weren't selling great so Jordan Roth only has to pay for cutting the lumber a little smaller". And clearly, that's why it's taken so long to make it official. Long story short: expensive.... probably one of the pricier moves in Broadway history, and I'd bet my life, almost certainly the priciest that a theater owner was ever responsible for. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hardly. | |
| Posted by: ryhog 04:10 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: Hardly. - ShowGoer 02:33 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| I'd say your imagination is running a little amok. Yes, S/F low-balled it because there are a lot of other (relatively small but not nominal) costs but most of the rest of these things just get worked out. And when you have a theatre owner also (actually) producing, things get worked out easily because the truth is, no player involved in this is interested in damaging a relationship. No seatgeek will not be keeping fees on both shows and a single, easy transfer of revenue will take place. Do not underestimate how much seat geek wants to be friendly with Jordan; they are business partners. Not to mention they would reasonably expect more net revenue, not less. As I have said here many times, stop clauses are window dressing, not something people who plan to need each other in the future bring up. If Garth did not have a stop clause engaged, no one will. lol This is not that big of a deal. There is no "move." Telecharge does not have to do anything other than take a data dump from the production and a few tweaks from the GM. And I think most people looking at this expect piano lesson will do better not worse. P.S. They've already raised ticket prices at the Barrymore. Supply and demand and all that jazz. :-) I know folks enjoy this kind of thing (as do I) but this a friendly deal that is mutually beneficial. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hardly. | |
| Posted by: dramedy 04:16 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Hardly. - ryhog 04:10 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Roth isn’t a producer of piano lesson. Why would they invoke stop clause for paradise square? It’s not that any show was ready to move in for the summer. And the shuberts were collecting rent for those months for an otherwise vacant theater. As for lack of payments—that’s for courts to decide and I assume the shuberts made sure their lease payments were made first. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hardly. | |
| Posted by: ryhog 05:53 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Hardly. - dramedy 04:16 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Roth produces ITW, and orchestrated the shift. That's the point. The PS comment was in the nature of a joke, but the point is, the stop clause never comes into play. Unless a producer is producing their last show. And yes, the Shuberts take their money off the top, so no risk. To reiterate: 1. This is not as big a deal as some want to make it. 2. This is not as complicated as some want to make it. 3. This arrangement is a mutually beneficial one between ongoing business partners. No one is sticking it to anyone. 4. At the end of the day, landlords have all the cards, which makes decision-making easier all around. 5. The only aggrieved parties will be the ones who are convinced they got screwed in their seat reassignment. They can exchange or get a refund but it is virtually inconceivable the impact on the production will not be de minimis. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hardly. | |
| Posted by: allineedisthegirl 03:23 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: Hardly. - ShowGoer 02:33 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Isn't it possible that the producers of The Piano Lesson see the move as a blessing? db |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| We don’t know | |
| Posted by: dramedy 03:43 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Hardly. - allineedisthegirl 03:23 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| If shuberts charge more for their theater than jujamacyn or at least made a deal to fill in the fall at a reduced rate. It could very well be that there will be an increase by a percentage or two in the lease. My guess also is piano lesson don’t want to piss off jordan Roth for future rentals for their shows at his theaters so probably didn’t hard bargain even though they had the upper hand—this is only conjecture on my part. The Audience was a little different since the schoenfeld and Jacobs are almost identical floor plans and both owned by the shuberts. I was surprised that the producers of the audience didn’t take $500k pure profit at the time offered by the producers of its only a play but maybe they were holding out for more. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hardly. | |
| Last Edit: ShowGoer 03:43 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| Posted by: ShowGoer 03:41 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Hardly. - allineedisthegirl 03:23 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| “ Isn't it possible that the producers of The Piano Lesson see the move as a blessing? ” Sure. But if there are further costs involved with a forced move, reimbursements that they’re legally entitled to, and additional penalties that can be negotiated, all of which might make it easier to make back their money and hopefully return a profit to their investors - … even if they secretly see it as a blessing, it would be not only unnecessary but irresponsible to admit that to anyone, wouldn’t it? |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| That’s a good point | |
| Posted by: dramedy 03:46 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Hardly. - ShowGoer 03:41 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| That the investors signed up for x seats theater with potential y grosses and those numbers changed. I assume none of the investors backed out but that might be a clause in the funding documents. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: That’s a good point | |
| Posted by: ShowGoer 03:54 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: That’s a good point - dramedy 03:46 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Exactly. And that’s a further good point. I’m sure there’s a lot of contingent language, some it depending on how the production ultimately does. Based on what you say here, which I hadn’t thought about, in the event that Piano Lesson becomes a sold-out hit for the entire run at premium prices - and also because it regardless the seating capacity is significantly smaller - if the play is a hit, I bet there’s language in the ‘move memo’ reflecting that. In other words, I bet there’s a scenario that could potentially lead to Jucjamcyn paying the Piano Lesson producers for unsold seats… i.e. Jujamcyn paying the cost of at least some of the additional tickets that Piano Lesson would’ve been able to profit from had the show been allowed to stay where it was. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Hardly. | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 02:38 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: Hardly. - ShowGoer 02:33 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Good points, especially about the ticketing fees, though since they haven't actually loaded in yet, I don't know that there would be additional expenses in that regard. And the renegotiation of the salaries might add more money... but again, presuming that the stars had a cut of the box office, we're talking about the difference between potential earnings at a larger theater if they had sold all those seats, which wasn't yet an issue for them. Will be interesting to see if folks who bough tickets in the balcony (as opposed to the mezz) are reseated at the original price they purchased, since I'm presuming rear mezz at the Barrymore would be the same price as rear mezz in the St. James. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I wonder how much it cost. | |
| Posted by: ryhog 12:14 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: I wonder how much it cost. - dramedy 11:34 am EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| I don't know but ... "The audience"? And yes the followup announcement should not take long. The only question is how they extend it. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I wonder how much it cost. | |
| Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 12:24 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: I wonder how much it cost. - ryhog 12:14 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| When I first read dramedy's post, I thought he meant the paying audience, who had bought a ticket for a McNally play, was offered $500K to see the play in a different theater. I was trying to make sense of that statement until I realized he was referring to the play about Queen Elizabeth The Audience, which I did actually see. I was pretty sure no one had ever made that generous offer to me. Anyway, the confusion gave me a good laugh on this nondescript Tuesday morning. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| I should have used the acronym TA | |
| Posted by: dramedy 12:43 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: I wonder how much it cost. - BroadwayTonyJ 12:24 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| That would have made it crystal clear. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I should have used the acronym TA | |
| Posted by: ryhog 05:56 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: I should have used the acronym TA - dramedy 12:43 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Yes. Teaching assistants are woefully underpaid. I am glad to hear they got a half million extra. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I should have used the acronym TA | |
| Posted by: waterfall 05:48 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: I should have used the acronym TA - dramedy 12:43 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| I suppose you're joking, but the misunderstanding began when you didn't capitalize "audience" in this sentence: "The audience was offered $500k to move to a different theater to allow McNally play to stay put." A simple typo, no doubt, but it took me a minute to figure it out. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I should have used the acronym TA | |
| Posted by: BroadwayTonyJ 05:10 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: I should have used the acronym TA - dramedy 12:43 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| No problem. It was fine that you spelled it out. It only took me a minute to understand your meaning. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I wonder how much it cost. | |
| Posted by: sandiegomax 12:41 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: I wonder how much it cost. - BroadwayTonyJ 12:24 pm EDT 07/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| LOL I read it that way too. My mind went to theaters now operating like airlines, offering money to change flights. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.058044 seconds.