5,062 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jan 24, 2018 17:04:25 GMT
I could also see Sir Cameron raiding his piggy bank! He won’t make that mistake again, like he did at the Novello. |
|
7,190 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Jan 24, 2018 17:18:29 GMT
Another question is how the Monopolies Commission (no, not the one who decides how much Park Lane will cost) will view bids from the most likely contenders. There may be mutterings, particularly if ATG bid, possibly even DelMac, I'd guess. Wonder if Nederlander are interested? Can't see RU adding to their portfolio, considering they wanted to divest a few years back. Could Nimax or Panter/Squire (Pants?) raise the cash - wouldn't mind either of them getting it. If I win the lottery between now and then, though... I could see Nimax being interested although they have the Astoria coming in 2020/2021 so they might think that seven theatres is enough for them. Trafalgar Entertainment Group (Panter and Squire's company) to me would seem more likely, they're looking to acquire more theatres and the TRH at 893 seats is almost triple the capacity of Trafalgar Studios 1. |
|
7,190 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Jan 24, 2018 18:27:02 GMT
The only question is would they want an inflexible grade I listed building? I see very little chance of them being permitted to alter the layout even temporarily, in the manner they enjoyed doing. True but at the same time, it could be their receiving house and Trafalgar 1 could be the theatre for more flexible productions. |
|
21 posts
|
Post by queenie on Jan 25, 2018 7:50:40 GMT
Ah, the end of an era with Mr Crook's retirement. What a huge contribution the management of this theatre have made to the careers of young people with the Masterclass Trust. Long may it continue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jan 25, 2018 14:52:39 GMT
Not interested. The Grade 1 listing would prevent me from flattening the place and replacing it with a proper modern theatre with good sight lines, toilets, front of house etc.
|
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jan 25, 2018 20:09:16 GMT
I really want one of the main theatre owners to get it.
|
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jan 25, 2018 20:10:36 GMT
I could also see Sir Cameron raiding his piggy bank! He won’t make that mistake again, like he did at the Novello. What do you mean Phantom of London? |
|
5,062 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jan 25, 2018 20:53:52 GMT
He won’t make that mistake again, like he did at the Novello. What do you mean Phantom of London ? Oh Betty! |
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jan 25, 2018 21:05:30 GMT
Ah, Blue Eyes. Took me a while!
|
|
3,351 posts
|
Post by Dr Tom on Jan 25, 2018 23:16:10 GMT
You have your tickets for the Joe Pasquale tour already? |
|
1,250 posts
|
Post by joem on Jan 26, 2018 0:09:07 GMT
When a lease goes below 60 years it becomes increasingly difficult to get bank finance, this may put off some buyers.
The capacity of the Theatre Royal is quite forbidding for straight productions, if you get a production wrong it can go very horribly wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 6:46:46 GMT
Yes, and the (relatively) short lease might put the new owner off investing too much in improving facilities. But the lease was extended in 1987, so presumably no fundamental reason the new owners couldn't negotiate an extension with Mrs Queen as part of the deal.
|
|
816 posts
|
Post by stefy69 on Jan 26, 2018 7:30:49 GMT
Given it's historical importance/significance I wouldn't have thought there was the slightest doubt that the lease will continue to be renewed far into the future.
|
|
2,778 posts
|
Post by daniel on Jan 26, 2018 8:53:44 GMT
Given it's historical importance/significance I wouldn't have thought there was the slightest doubt that the lease will continue to be renewed far into the future. precisely. Plus, I'm sure that if a prospective operator went into negotiations and said "we're willing to spend £x on refurbishments but will need the lease extending by y years", there would be room for negotiation on the terms. |
|
5,159 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Jan 26, 2018 13:28:59 GMT
if you get a production wrong it can go very horribly wrong. As the TRH learnt to its considerable cost with The Libertine. In the last financial year they wrote off £616,067 as unrecoverable, from just that one production. Ouch! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 13:35:45 GMT
Meanwhile there's a GoFundMe for it happening: www.gofundme.com/bossy-buy-theatre-royal-haymarketWhich even if they don't reach the target, and manage the "impossible" (yes before anyone mansplains it to me I realise there's more to a theatre than just buying the building) it's still raising a chunk of change for putting on some theatre. So why the hell not eh? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2018 14:33:03 GMT
I think whoever buys it should use it for selling hay.
|
|
7,190 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Jan 26, 2018 16:48:02 GMT
if you get a production wrong it can go very horribly wrong. As the TRH learnt to its considerable cost with The Libertine. In the last financial year they wrote off £616,067 as unrecoverable, from just that one production. Ouch! No wonder they’re selling! I think under a theatre operator like Nimax or ATG, it could thrive. |
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jan 26, 2018 16:51:44 GMT
As the TRH learnt to its considerable cost with The Libertine. In the last financial year they wrote off £616,067 as unrecoverable, from just that one production. Ouch! No wonder they’re selling! I think under a theatre operator like Nimax or ATG, it could thrive. So do I and I'm praying it goes to one of them! A group with vast commercial experience would hugely benefit it. |
|
1,250 posts
|
Post by joem on Jan 26, 2018 18:07:48 GMT
The logical niche for a theatre this size is transfers for big hits from the subsidised sector and celeb-of-the-moment casting in accessible plays.
|
|
7,190 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Jan 26, 2018 19:43:17 GMT
The logical niche for a theatre this size is transfers for big hits from the subsidised sector and celeb-of-the-moment casting in accessible plays. Similar sized theatres like The Noel Coward or Harold Pinter Theatre have had no problems attracting productions that sell well so it does seem that the current owner IMO can't compete and selling TRH is likely the best option. |
|
4,029 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Jan 27, 2018 11:51:57 GMT
It went through my mind that the RSC should buy it as their new London home. I thought their Love's Labours Lost & Much Ado sat very well in there last year so I'd agree with that idea. |
|
7,190 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Jan 27, 2018 13:14:42 GMT
It went through my mind that the RSC should buy it as their new London home. I’m not sure the RSC could afford it. It’s a good suggestion though |
|
5,159 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Jan 27, 2018 13:45:28 GMT
If it was bought by a charity, like the RSC, then it would be eligible for business rates relief of at least 80%, and possibly 100% if the City of Westminster wanted to play ball.
On the other hand, a commercial operator will be looking at a rates bill of over £100k pa.
|
|
7,190 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Jan 27, 2018 14:50:01 GMT
If it was bought by a charity, like the RSC, then it would be eligible for business rates relief of at least 80%, and possibly 100% if the City of Westminster wanted to play ball. On the other hand, a commercial operator will be looking at a rates bill of over £100k pa. I wonder what the asking price is, The Palace was sold to Nimax for £20m and I think Cameron paid £30m for the VP but that might include the refurb costs so my guess is that the TRH is probably between £10-15m maybe a bit less |
|
