3,084 posts
|
Post by Rory on Mar 17, 2024 16:09:35 GMT
Rory, do you feel the pricing systems work for your planning? Well it just means that if it's something I really want to see, I have to book in advance at often wild prices and can't leave it to chance for a last minute deal.
|
|
3,927 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Mar 23, 2024 15:55:56 GMT
|
|
394 posts
|
Post by Distant Dreamer... on Mar 23, 2024 17:11:32 GMT
The headline looks pertinent, I can’t read it though as I’m not a subscriber 😂. What’s the summary?
|
|
3,927 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Mar 23, 2024 19:35:14 GMT
I'm not a subscriber either but I could read it because the link, which is from a Times critic on Twitter, comes with a share token. I'm afraid I am hopeless at writing summaries. If no-one else can read it either then I suppose I'll have to ask the moderators to remove it.
|
|
|
Post by newda on Mar 23, 2024 21:13:48 GMT
It doesn't share a direct link, but stick the Times link in here and it should be readable: 12ft.io/
|
|
|
Post by happysooz2 on Mar 27, 2024 15:22:35 GMT
I'm not a subscriber either but I could read it because the link, which is from a Times critic on Twitter, comes with a share token. I'm afraid I am hopeless at writing summaries. If no-one else can read it either then I suppose I'll have to ask the moderators to remove it. It worked for me and I’m not a subscriber. Thank you for sharing, it’s a very interesting article. Nice shout out for Operation Mincemeat too.
|
|
|
Post by Arcana on Mar 28, 2024 9:25:53 GMT
The headline looks pertinent, I can’t read it though as I’m not a subscriber 😂. What’s the summary? From ChatGPT... The article discusses the escalating ticket prices in London's West End theatre district and the growing discontent among both actors and audiences. It highlights examples of top seats for popular shows like Cabaret and Plaza Suite reaching as high as £300, with additional costs for premium experiences. Many people, including actors like David Tennant and Andrew Scott, have criticized these prices as exorbitant and unaffordable. Producers argue that the high costs are necessary to cover the increasing expenses of running a production, such as rising wages, production costs, and theater rentals. They also point out that the average ticket price, according to the Society of London Theatre, is around £57.13, showing a decrease in real terms when adjusted for inflation. However, some producers acknowledge that the £300 price tag for top seats is a bad look and may deter potential theatergoers. They emphasize efforts to keep prices accessible, such as offering cheaper seats and implementing lottery systems for discounted tickets. The article also explores alternative pricing strategies, such as offering all seats at the same price, as seen in productions like Operation Mincemeat, or maintaining a range of prices to cater to different audiences. Overall, while there is acknowledgment of the financial challenges faced by theater producers, there is also a call for more transparency and efforts to make theatergoing more affordable and inclusive.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 28, 2024 17:40:19 GMT
The most interesting thing for me in the article is the coy suggestion that a star in a straight play will be paid “a low five figure sum” per week. “Low” in this context meaning something like £20,000 a week ? The article is littered with very specific figures for ticket prices for specific productions but none for the ballpark cost of the cast and creatives involved. Maybe Tennant and co should complain about that rather than blaming everything on the producers ?
It is the last taboo - you can read actors’ autobiographies and find out absolutely everything about their work and private lives, including medical details, but absolutely nothing about how much they actually got paid for any of their jobs. This is a notable feature of Alan Rickman’s Diaries - he moans on about not getting a pay rise for the later Harry Potter films without telling us how much he actually gets for them. It is left for us to deduce and as he owns a house in London, an apartment in New York, and a house in Tuscany I suppose it must be “low seven figures”.
|
|
868 posts
|
Post by BVM on Mar 29, 2024 8:55:54 GMT
The most interesting thing for me in the article is the coy suggestion that a star in a straight play will be paid “a low five figure sum” per week. “Low” in this context meaning something like £20,000 a week ? The article is littered with very specific figures for ticket prices for specific productions but none for the ballpark cost of the cast and creatives involved. Maybe Tennant and co should complain about that rather than blaming everything on the producers ? It is the last taboo - you can read actors’ autobiographies and find out absolutely everything about their work and private lives, including medical details, but absolutely nothing about how much they actually got paid for any of their jobs. This is a notable feature of Alan Rickman’s Diaries - he moans on about not getting a pay rise for the later Harry Potter films without telling us how much he actually gets for them. It is left for us to deduce and as he owns a house in London, an apartment in New York, and a house in Tuscany I suppose it must be “low seven figures”. It's a taboo in life full stop though - I'd be fascinated to know what all my mates earn but none of them would ever tell me! I work in the public sector so they can look my pay scale up online lol.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Mar 29, 2024 10:27:15 GMT
It's a taboo in life full stop though - I'd be fascinated to know what all my mates earn but none of them would ever tell me! Yes. The taboo doesn't apply to some countries outside UK though. In Finland you can look up the tax records of anyone you want. Someone from New Zealand also told me that there it is a valid topic for conversation between friends.
|
|
868 posts
|
Post by BVM on Mar 29, 2024 10:37:29 GMT
It's a taboo in life full stop though - I'd be fascinated to know what all my mates earn but none of them would ever tell me! Yes. The taboo doesn't apply to some countries outside UK though. In Finland you can look up the tax records of anyone you want. Someone from New Zealand also told me that there it is a valid topic for conversation between friends. I wish it was the case here! There's a lot of passive aggression from certain members of my friendship group re who earns what!
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Mar 29, 2024 18:44:52 GMT
I can't work out who's paying the top prices.
I know tourist season is about 11 1/2 months a year now but it's not crazy busy. Perhaps it's all those wealthy northerners reaping the benefits of levelling up ..
|
|
18,842 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Mar 29, 2024 20:14:58 GMT
I can't work out who's paying the top prices. I know tourist season is about 11 1/2 months a year now but it's not crazy busy. Perhaps it's all those wealthy northerners reaping the benefits of levelling up .. Not everyone is staggering around London with easy access to the rush.
|
|
|
Post by scarletmood on Mar 29, 2024 23:18:16 GMT
It's a taboo in life full stop though - I'd be fascinated to know what all my mates earn but none of them would ever tell me! I work in the public sector so they can look my pay scale up online lol. That is the good thing about public sector you can pretty much work out what salary everyone is on.
|
|
|
Post by osdtdg on Mar 30, 2024 3:46:29 GMT
I can't work out who's paying the top prices. I know tourist season is about 11 1/2 months a year now but it's not crazy busy. Perhaps it's all those wealthy northerners reaping the benefits of levelling up .. Not everyone is staggering around London with easy access to the rush. Exactly this! As a foreigner who visits London, I know I will pay higher prices up-front to ensure I have a seat for the shows I want to see. I am willing to pay that price to ensure that I get my schedule sorted and fit all the shows i am desparate for into my limited schedule. If I do have an extra slot or two free, maybe I do go to one of my maybes with rush; but yeah as someone who doesn't want to risk missing out [at least in terms of certain shows] I am willing to pay that price.
|
|
|
Post by aspieandy on Mar 30, 2024 8:30:49 GMT
I used Rush for the first time to see Dorian Gray, and that was because I messed up and missed the boat; usually I book when public booking opens in order to get a better cheap seat. If you want bargains, I do think you need to plan way in advance. tbh, I don't really know the demographic of Rush punters, though I can see it's a very convenient secondary market for venues.
Interesting changes in the low-end lodge/inns. I wonder if this has to do with the emergence of TWaTs, you can get away with two nights in a London hotel and live the other end of the country.
* Tuesday, Wed and Thurs (in the office)
|
|
2,569 posts
|
Post by viserys on Mar 30, 2024 8:54:26 GMT
Foreign traveller here, too, mostly focused on musicals. I really mourn the loss of in-person day seats as they were something you could actively control by being there early enough. And being a tourist with nothing to do, it was great for me, get to the theatre around 8-9am (depending on a show's popularity), wait in line with a coffee and a good book, get a cheap ticket, walk off happily.
Today's options are all a game of luck - getting tickets in online rush/lottery is by no means guaranteed, dynamic pricing can go any which way and you never know what seats are left. It's great for locals who can just keep checking the booking website until a great seat at a dynamic discount pops up for a show they want to see and head out - but not for anyone outside London.
And as others have mentioned, hotel prices have become insane as well, so between that and being forced to book theatre tickets at full price ahead if I really want to see something, my London trips have become so much more expensive, that I struggle to justify them.
An additional factor for me is that when I spend half a day traveling from the continent to get to London, I want to see something big and spectacular. Small "quirky" shows with a cast of four and one basic stage set certainly have their own merits, but are just not worth travelling for. I might squish one of those in if I have a free slot and the subject interests me (which has become rarer and rarer, too).
Funny enough this has steered me more towards Broadway of all places. While lots of people moan (rightly) about the (regular) prices on Broadway, it's much easier for out-of-towners to get discounted tickets to all but the most hyped shows - most do in-person rush at the box office and TKTS still does 40-50% off for lots of shows on the day of. And right now Broadway has tons of interesting new big shows with half a dozen more already in the pipeline. And while hotel prices in Manhattan used to feel insane, London is now almost on par with them, so the only "obstacle" that remains is the higher flight price to get across the Atlantic.
|
|
|
Post by theatregoer22 on Mar 30, 2024 14:32:16 GMT
Foreign traveller here, too, mostly focused on musicals. I really mourn the loss of in-person day seats as they were something you could actively control by being there early enough. And being a tourist with nothing to do, it was great for me, get to the theatre around 8-9am (depending on a show's popularity), wait in line with a coffee and a good book, get a cheap ticket, walk off happily. Today's options are all a game of luck - getting tickets in online rush/lottery is by no means guaranteed, dynamic pricing can go any which way and you never know what seats are left. It's great for locals who can just keep checking the booking website until a great seat at a dynamic discount pops up for a show they want to see and head out - but not for anyone outside London. And as others have mentioned, hotel prices have become insane as well, so between that and being forced to book theatre tickets at full price ahead if I really want to see something, my London trips have become so much more expensive, that I struggle to justify them. An additional factor for me is that when I spend half a day traveling from the continent to get to London, I want to see something big and spectacular. Small "quirky" shows with a cast of four and one basic stage set certainly have their own merits, but are just not worth travelling for. I might squish one of those in if I have a free slot and the subject interests me (which has become rarer and rarer, too). Funny enough this has steered me more towards Broadway of all places. While lots of people moan (rightly) about the (regular) prices on Broadway, it's much easier for out-of-towners to get discounted tickets to all but the most hyped shows - most do in-person rush at the box office and TKTS still does 40-50% off for lots of shows on the day of. And right now Broadway has tons of interesting new big shows with half a dozen more already in the pipeline. And while hotel prices in Manhattan used to feel insane, London is now almost on par with them, so the only "obstacle" that remains is the higher flight price to get across the Atlantic. Even as a Londoner, the lotteries that only notify winners a few hours before the performance starts aren't all that convenient (looking at you Hadestown and Cabaret). But otherwise I am glad there are ways to get discounted tickets online, as I'm not a morning person and I wouldn't want to make a 1-1/2 hour journey into central London without already having tickets.
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Mar 31, 2024 13:57:17 GMT
The most interesting thing for me in the article is the coy suggestion that a star in a straight play will be paid “a low five figure sum” per week. “Low” in this context meaning something like £20,000 a week ? The article is littered with very specific figures for ticket prices for specific productions but none for the ballpark cost of the cast and creatives involved. Maybe Tennant and co should complain about that rather than blaming everything on the producers ? It is the last taboo - you can read actors’ autobiographies and find out absolutely everything about their work and private lives, including medical details, but absolutely nothing about how much they actually got paid for any of their jobs. This is a notable feature of Alan Rickman’s Diaries - he moans on about not getting a pay rise for the later Harry Potter films without telling us how much he actually gets for them. It is left for us to deduce and as he owns a house in London, an apartment in New York, and a house in Tuscany I suppose it must be “low seven figures”. I struggle to feel concern for star names who think they've been underpaid, when it's apparent they are significantly wealthier than most people we'd consider to be rich. I have some sympathy to the notion that if someone signs up for something that goes onto become very financially successful, especially a multi-part film series (whose role is more important than some would have initially assumed), then they should get a share of that success. As budgets increased, so should fees for the actors, but it was a large cast and I expect a lot went on the special effects. So I'm not losing any sleep over it. I read a recent interview by a well known, but not mega-famous Hollywood tv actor who has had a successful career, especially in the last few years. He seemed to be moaning* about how he wasn't as rich as people think they are, and made reference to the salaries of the cast of Friends. Which I interpreted as him being surprised that he's not as wealthy as he dreamed he'd be. He was talking in part in the context of the actors' strikes and that after several months of not working he was beginning to wonder how he'd pay his mortgage. I was on the side of the actors during the SAG actors' strike. But when a Hollywood star talks about their income not always matching their mortgage, I can't help wonder if he has a house in a fashionable part of LA with a pool, a wardrobe full of designer clothes and high end cars in the drive? And I do appreciate that many actors believe, possibly correctly, that if you want to be seen as a Hollywood star then you have to live the part off-screen as well as on. * I realise the apparent moaning may have been a bit of journalistic spin, but celebrity salary expectations often seem to be more about ego than whether or not they can pay their bills.
|
|
|
Post by scarletmood on Apr 1, 2024 1:30:18 GMT
We do very rarely hear what money any star in the West End is on. A top actor doing a play will probably earn a fraction of what they get for stage and screen but we never hear about what sort of money the stars of established musicals are on. The producers must have some sort of pay scale above the Equity minimum they pay some performers but it is all hush hush.
|
|
|
Post by americanresident3333 on Apr 1, 2024 10:44:32 GMT
There’s a certain actor who was/is in a West End play that happens to be one of the more expensive ones to attend, and this actor and said play keep getting brought up in these West End ticket prices/celebrities taking over the West End news articles. But this actor isn’t even someone I’d call famous (not saying that as an insult to their talents, just speaking in terms of name recognition). If you’ve heard of them it’s only been very recently, like within the last 1-2 years and they’re still really obscure. I don’t that actor is some some rich famous celebrity.
A lot of these articles seem to insinuate that it’s the actors’ faults that ticket prices are high and that the actors are therefore being greedy. I don’t think that’s the case.
|
|
|
Post by scarletmood on Apr 1, 2024 13:40:56 GMT
If you get a hot property from a film or a TV series on the stage like Daniel Radcliffe or now Tom Holland there will be a demand for tickets so prices will be higher even if the actor isn't an acclaimed veteran like say Brian Cox.
I'll also factor in agent's cuts etc. Can anyone recall when AlW wanted Scarlett Johansson for Sound of Music and was close to agreeing a deal which I think I read or maybe ALW actually stated was about £15k per week but then the agent pulled out of negotiations as they felt Scarlett could make a load more doing film roles and they thus get a bigger cut.
Several very well known actors have said they took on work which would be considered "low brow" for them as the film roles paid so well then they had the freedom to explore more challenging but less well remunerated stage roles.
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Apr 1, 2024 15:24:12 GMT
I'm sure you are right about agents being more bothered about fees than many of the actors, although it is arguably the responsibility of those stars to see that their agent knows their priorities. If it's important to them they should either agree to a balance of big money vs rewarding, or ensure their agent gets a minimum fee in absolute terms in any given year.
There will be a lot of agents who are keen for their hot property client to do as much high paid work in as short a space of time as possible, regardless of whether it is good for their long term financial interests, never mind whether or not they'll find it rewarding. It takes a certain amount of confidence/motivation/savviness to forge your own path. And it's one thing to get your agent to organise your schedule so you can spend a few weeks on a mid-budget indy film that will hopefully score well on IMDB, but another to block out three+ months for a stage show.
|
|
|
Post by justfran on Apr 1, 2024 18:04:22 GMT
I struggle to feel concern for star names who think they've been underpaid, when it's apparent they are significantly wealthier than most people we'd consider to be rich. I have some sympathy to the notion that if someone signs up for something that goes onto become very financially successful, especially a multi-part film series (whose role is more important than some would have initially assumed), then they should get a share of that success. As budgets increased, so should fees for the actors, but it was a large cast and I expect a lot went on the special effects. So I'm not losing any sleep over it. I read a recent interview by a well known, but not mega-famous Hollywood tv actor who has had a successful career, especially in the last few years. He seemed to be moaning* about how he wasn't as rich as people think they are, and made reference to the salaries of the cast of Friends. Which I interpreted as him being surprised that he's not as wealthy as he dreamed he'd be. He was talking in part in the context of the actors' strikes and that after several months of not working he was beginning to wonder how he'd pay his mortgage. I was on the side of the actors during the SAG actors' strike. But when a Hollywood star talks about their income not always matching their mortgage, I can't help wonder if he has a house in a fashionable part of LA with a pool, a wardrobe full of designer clothes and high end cars in the drive? And I do appreciate that many actors believe, possibly correctly, that if you want to be seen as a Hollywood star then you have to live the part off-screen as well as on. * I realise the apparent moaning may have been a bit of journalistic spin, but celebrity salary expectations often seem to be more about ego than whether or not they can pay their bills. I think I read the same article and couldn't help but roll my eyes - I think a Hollywood celebrity had a different interpretation of not being able to pay their mortgage than me (surely if anyone was literally unable to pay bills, they would look for alternative employment?). Whilst I don't think star salaries are a direct reason for high ticket prices, they are definitely a contributing factor to the very high running costs of a show.
|
|
|
Post by scarletmood on Apr 1, 2024 21:31:18 GMT
A lot of star names are multi millionaires so can afford to do stage work. The likes of SJP and Brian Cox must have earned themselves and their agents millions over the years so can pretty much say what they will and will not do.
Say a rising star like the chap out of Saltburn his agent would likely want to push him to max out his earnings whilst he is hot but it should not be at the risk of turning down some quality roles that could lead to good reviews or possible awards.
Stars to be honest with social media can be doing "highbrow less well paid" roles but can earn a load through doing a few posts for products so can get around the earnings drop that way.
Or they do what a lot of bands/singers do and have a Ltd company so whether they are touring or recording can draw an equal income all the time.
|
|
231 posts
|
Post by harrietcraig on Apr 2, 2024 13:32:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by scarletmood on Apr 2, 2024 13:48:27 GMT
I'd like to see more general offers being made available to all theatre fans. It just seems to be the U25's who get the great offers to encourage new fans to shows. I'd like a certain amount of cheaper tickets for each show or venues like ATG do one cheaper show per West End run for their regulars.
Reward loyalty as a lot of people who love shows and post on here are the backbone of theatre attendees and will give new shows a chance. Dynamic pricing I'm not opposed to as Saturday night should be more than midweek matinee and supply and demand will shift.
|
|
5,593 posts
|
Post by lynette on Apr 2, 2024 17:18:35 GMT
Thanks for posting this. Seems Covid responsible in the same way the Black Death was for end of feudal system 😂 scarcity of resources and people knowing their worth.
|
|
5,593 posts
|
Post by lynette on Apr 2, 2024 17:20:06 GMT
I'd like to see more general offers being made available to all theatre fans. It just seems to be the U25's who get the great offers to encourage new fans to shows. I'd like a certain amount of cheaper tickets for each show or venues like ATG do one cheaper show per West End run for their regulars. Reward loyalty as a lot of people who love shows and post on here are the backbone of theatre attendees and will give new shows a chance. Dynamic pricing I'm not opposed to as Saturday night should be more than midweek matinee and supply and demand will shift. You’ve gotta encourage the U25s. Or theatre will just dwindle away. But yes to more discounts for old ‘uns, say Monday/Tuesday nights and the matinees. Thank you
|
|
|
Post by marob on Apr 3, 2024 12:52:27 GMT
I’ve just seen a video advert on Instagram advertising a seat filling service. I thought the whole point of them was they were supposed to be under the radar?
|
|