19,793 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Oct 23, 2019 6:57:00 GMT
Just picking up on shady23’s post in the Les Mis Concert thread where they’re selling seats described as restricted view for £97. Just let that land. £100 (with the inevitable fees) and you won’t get a clear view of the stage. I’m probably in a minority by thinking that it shouldn’t be legal to sell a ticket for something that you can’t see fully from a normal sitting position in the allocated seat. That would fall into the “not fit for purpose” camp for me. A further minority opinion would be that people might ooh and aah at these Victorian theatres but the seating isn’t of architectural importance so why not rip it out and reconfigure these auditoriums a completely different way? Of course I know the answer to that. Cost, and the fact that there won’t be as many seats in the new layout as there were before so joe public has to continue paying the money and dodging rails, other peoples heads, side walls, lighting rigs and all while being kneecapped by the seat in front. It’s a disgrace and I can’t think of another industry where it would be tolerated. |
|
19,793 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Oct 23, 2019 7:06:22 GMT
And there you go, within seconds of posting I have thought of one. Hideously expensive rail travel tickets that don’t guarantee a seat on the train. I suppose the difference there is that people do have to get to work, they don’t have to go to the theatre.
|
|
2,702 posts
|
Post by viserys on Oct 23, 2019 7:17:34 GMT
Well, Burly, when it comes to train travel, I don't know how this works on yonder fair isle, but here in Germany the Bahn charges 5 Euro extra for a seat reservation on their long-distance trains. Then, very often, you get an announcement "Train XY has been cancelled, replacement train YZ will be running instead, reservations are not valid for that one" - so everyone scrambles for a seat (if there are even some left when the train rolls into YOUR station), but don't expect for one second that the cost for your now pointless reservation will be returned. How that's anything but a rip-off scheme I don't know.
As for the theatre - well, as long as they clearly state it's restricted view, I guess they can get away with it. It's the whole nice capitalist "supply and demand" at work. The only way to curb this nonsense would be if people would simply refuse to pay. Same goes for the whole premium pricing scheme. Once it's clear that people are not willing to pay, premium pricing is usually quietly rearranged into much fewer seats/prices come down. But you will always find mugs who are willing to pay extra for something they seem a "once in a lifetime" thing. Says the mug who forked out $250 for a seat in NY, although that one was front row at least.
|
|
4,361 posts
|
Post by shady23 on Oct 23, 2019 7:23:55 GMT
Within a few hours the three tickets left have sold so people are willing to pay.
I hope they saw the restricted view warning. It was just above the warning that Alfie is not performing on the day so it might turn out to be a double disappointment!
|
|
5,707 posts
|
Post by lynette on Oct 23, 2019 7:49:57 GMT
Just picking up on shady23 ’s post in the Les Mis Concert thread where they’re selling seats described as restricted view for £97. Just let that land. £100 (with the inevitable fees) and you won’t get a clear view of the stage. I’m probably in a minority by thinking that it shouldn’t be legal to sell a ticket for something that you can’t see fully from a normal sitting position in the allocated seat. That would fall into the “not fit for purpose” camp for me. A further minority opinion would be that people might ooh and aah at these Victorian theatres but the seating isn’t of architectural importance so why not rip it out and reconfigure these auditoriums a completely different way? Of course I know the answer to that. Cost, and the fact that there won’t be as many seats in the new layout as there were before so joe public has to continue paying the money and dodging rails, other peoples heads, side walls, lighting rigs and all while being kneecapped by the seat in front. It’s a disgrace and I can’t think of another industry where it would be tolerated. They refigure The Old Vic to put seating on the other side so maybe other theatres could do that. And I noticed that at the Old Vic for lungs there was tons of space at the side of the stalls, really tons, could have plonked another few seats in there. We were on the aisle and I could have had a cocktail party in the space next me! |
|
|
|
Post by jcs619 on Oct 23, 2019 8:11:22 GMT
Just picking up on shady23 ’s post in the Les Mis Concert thread where they’re selling seats described as restricted view for £97. Just let that land. £100 (with the inevitable fees) and you won’t get a clear view of the stage. I’m probably in a minority by thinking that it shouldn’t be legal to sell a ticket for something that you can’t see fully from a normal sitting position in the allocated seat. That would fall into the “not fit for purpose” camp for me. A further minority opinion would be that people might ooh and aah at these Victorian theatres but the seating isn’t of architectural importance so why not rip it out and reconfigure these auditoriums a completely different way? Of course I know the answer to that. Cost, and the fact that there won’t be as many seats in the new layout as there were before so joe public has to continue paying the money and dodging rails, other peoples heads, side walls, lighting rigs and all while being kneecapped by the seat in front. It’s a disgrace and I can’t think of another industry where it would be tolerated.
Spot on.
If Cinemas were as uncomfortable and poorly configured as Theatres are no one would go to the Cinema at all.
We Theatregoers put up with a hell of a lot of things that wouldn't be tolerated in other entertainment forms to see the things that we love.
So called Premium Seats should be wider / have more legroom and a completely unobscured view to be sold ath the prices they are.
Don't even get me started on the being kept like cattle in the foyer beforehand / the ridiculous amount of stairs for people with limited/restricted mobility and the fact that Shows Sell Out immediately and then tickets pop up at inflated prices again and again.
|
|
4,993 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Oct 23, 2019 9:21:40 GMT
So many seats at the Royal opera House are restricted view. Booking is also a nightmare and expensive so I have generally given up on the place
|
|
19,793 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Oct 23, 2019 9:28:41 GMT
When they built these places did people not care about seeing the stage? Have we become incredibly picky/entitled because we want to actually see the thing we’ve paid to see?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2019 11:23:12 GMT
It’s a disgrace and I can’t think of another industry where it would be tolerated. Airline industry. Loads of terrible seats on many planes - and even "premium economy" on sum isn't much better than zoo class even at twice the price. Not only that but it's policy for many airlines to sell more than 100% of the seats in the expectation that some people won't show, and until the political types stepped in and forced them to pay compensation to delayed passengers their attitude was "We gambled, you lost, suck it up". (Now, of course, it's "We gambled, you lost, suck it up, here's a pittance".) As for the comparison with railways, the point of the railway is travel and you still get to travel even if you don't have a seat. However, the point of theatre is to see the show, and if you can't they really ought to be offering the seats for a very small fraction of the top price. But that seems to be the trend in theatre these days: a price range that used to follow a pattern of 100%, 75%, 50%, 25% now follows one of 100%, 95%, 92%, 90%. |
|
|
|
Post by liv22 on Oct 23, 2019 11:56:46 GMT
I saw Les Mis on the Saturday matinee just gone from a £37.50 restricted view seat in Row C of the Grand (can't quite remember which seat, but I was probably 4/5 seats in from the end). I knew when buying it there would be a restricted view, which is fine, I'm on a budget. But due to people in both rows infront leaning forward, it was virtually impossible to see anything at all a lot of the time. And then there's the dilemma of do I also lean forward because the people infront of me are, but then frustrating the view of whoever is sat behind me? Leaning forward for a prolonged amount of time isn't that comfortable anyway. I felt like the show was slightly ruined for me because I spent most of it either having to keep shifting round the moving heads of everyone infront or give up and just listen to the song without seeing the person it was coming from!
I understand I booked a restricted view seat, but I wish that everyone could sit normally and then you can just work with the view 'as is'. I'm not sure how much power FOH have to stop people leaning forward as people will do it anyway, but it was certainly a very frustrating experience.
|
|
5,159 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Oct 23, 2019 12:05:35 GMT
I think the Delfont Mackintosh website is the one that instructs bookers to lean forward. That being the case, it's unlikely FoH could, or would, take any action against those who do!
|
|
|
|
Post by juicy_but_terribly_drab on Oct 23, 2019 12:07:39 GMT
I wish every theatre website had a seat plan style view from the seat. It's so useful and I guess they just don't do it in case the view in a seat is abysmal and they don't want no one to book it.
|
|
7,189 posts
|
Post by Jon on Oct 23, 2019 12:13:19 GMT
Even with new builds, there’s always going to be the odd restricted view seat just because no show is ever the same.
I’ve always wondered whether a theatre would ever consider going the route of installing fewer but bigger seats route but charge more on the lower end,
|
|
7,189 posts
|
Post by Jon on Oct 23, 2019 13:44:28 GMT
It's so useful and I guess they just don't do it in case the view in a seat is abysmal and they don't want no one to book it. Many theatres do, and more will as the software is upgraded. The trouble is, many also complain that the representations are not that accurate, rendering them useless anyway. The trouble is, there are so many variables - the height of the customer, who is in front, personal opinion. With any picture, it is also how it is taken, where the camera is held etc, etc. Nothing can really show it that well, I think. fewer but bigger seats route but charge more on the lower end, That would wipe out the audience. Use the premium loading to subsidise would be more popular, I think. Wouldn’t people be happy to pay more for comfier seats, I know cinema seats aren’t comparable but given Everyman, Odeon Luxe and Cineworld VIP are able to charge a premium for their seats, I wonder a similar model could apply to theatre? |
|
|
|
Post by marob on Oct 23, 2019 13:48:12 GMT
When they built these places did people not care about seeing the stage? Have we become incredibly picky/entitled because we want to actually see the thing we’ve paid to see? I've wondered that many a time myself when I've ended up trying to peer round the back of someone's head. And I'm about 6' tall, so I really don't know how shorter people manage to see anything. I had a box seat at Wyndham's Theatre once because that was all that was left. I hated it. I'd rather not go than sit there again. I wonder how many people are put off theatre because of the seats. I don't think I would have gotten into it wasn't for the fact that my local theatre just has one block of raked seats. |
|
513 posts
|
Post by Deal J on Oct 23, 2019 14:07:10 GMT
Even with new builds, there’s always going to be the odd restricted view seat just because no show is ever the same. That reminds me of the ridiculous set design for Urinetown at The Other Palace (or St James as it was then). The stage had a second level so high and deep that anyone sat in the good seats couldn't see the action when the actors weren't right at the front. If I recall correctly, I think you only had a chance of seeing it all if you were in the cheap seats on the very back row! |
|
7,189 posts
|
Post by Jon on Oct 23, 2019 18:00:36 GMT
Wouldn’t people be happy to pay more for comfier seats, Possible, but the space they would take up would mean almost doubling the price, I'd guess. It's one thing fitting them in a modern cinema / cinema where they can make a lot on food to take it... old theatres are of course another. It’s interesting that the Bridge opted for theatre seats when they were building it. In terms of seats, recliners obviously wouldn’t work but sofa style seating for a new build small theatre would be interesting but I wonder if these new venues want flexibility so the seats have to be flexible |
|
4,029 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Oct 23, 2019 18:15:11 GMT
When they built these places did people not care about seeing the stage? In the case of the Royal Opera House that is precisely the case. Its horseshoe shape is because many of the audience were more interested in seeing the rest of the audience than the stage. Another point is that many of us on here use restricted view seats as a means of seeing shows on a budget. Very few are terrible, and some are a total bargain. Absolutely. I am very much in favour of restricted view seats where the restriction is such that it is worth the price reduction. I must have seen The Comedy About A Bank Robbery from stalls seat B22 over 50 times by now. It's less than half the price of the seat next to it & from there one only loses a few seconds of not great significance in a couple of scenes. Wouldn’t people be happy to pay more for comfier seats, I know cinema seats aren’t comparable but given Everyman, Odeon Luxe and Cineworld VIP are able to charge a premium for their seats, I wonder a similar model could apply to theatre? Given the amount theatres charge already for their uncomfortable seats then I really hope this doesn't happen, or I'd probably never be able to afford to go to the theatre again! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2019 19:05:30 GMT
Just picking up on shady23 ’s post in the Les Mis Concert thread where they’re selling seats described as restricted view for £97. Just let that land. £100 (with the inevitable fees) and you won’t get a clear view of the stage. I’m probably in a minority by thinking that it shouldn’t be legal to sell a ticket for something that you can’t see fully from a normal sitting position in the allocated seat. That would fall into the “not fit for purpose” camp for me. A further minority opinion would be that people might ooh and aah at these Victorian theatres but the seating isn’t of architectural importance so why not rip it out and reconfigure these auditoriums a completely different way? Of course I know the answer to that. Cost, and the fact that there won’t be as many seats in the new layout as there were before so joe public has to continue paying the money and dodging rails, other peoples heads, side walls, lighting rigs and all while being kneecapped by the seat in front. It’s a disgrace and I can’t think of another industry where it would be tolerated. I agree it's insane - and as you, in my ideal world, it would not be tolerated! Sadly of course, in the commercial world, it's supply and demand - and the ticket is worth what people pay.... I go to the theatre a lot in Germany, where many of the big musical houses are new (ish). And what they lack in history they MASSIVELY make up for in sightlines. Almost always steps between rows and offset seats - I have never had a bad view; it's a joy. And the seats are bigger and much more comfortable. But back to the UK, what infuriates me even more than an overpriced restricted view seat, is when a top price ticket that should be fine, ends up being restricted. When I saw Tina, had a seat in the rear ish (but still top price non premium) stalls. Minimal rake, seat directly in front of me, not offset at all; tall man sits down in front of me and blocks literally 80% of my view of the stage. Was SO bad on this occasion I considered writing to the theatre afterwards to see if there was any way I could get a discount to see it again. Assumed this would be totally pointless though. Dunno if anyone has ever tried?! |
|
|
|
Post by SamB (was badoerfan) on Oct 23, 2019 21:57:53 GMT
We were at my in-laws in Newcastle over the weekend, and I was reading the programme for upcoming show's at the city's Theatre Royal.
According to the ticket-buying information, they have two rows of Premium seats (I think they call them superseats), Rows F and G in the stalls I think, that *do* have extra legroom, for 'a small premium'. (For On Your Feet, they are £53 vs £51 and £48 for the other good stalls seats)
That's the way to do it!
|
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Oct 23, 2019 22:26:48 GMT
When they built these places did people not care about seeing the stage? In the case of the Royal Opera House that is precisely the case. Its horseshoe shape is because many of the audience were more interested in seeing the rest of the audience than the stage. That explains then. What I didn't understand at the weekend was so many very well-to-do types swishing their way to the ROH boxes, where they were going to spend 2 hours with their heads turned sideways. Madness.
Even the Coliseum boxes - presumably of the same turn-of-the-century era - face roughly the appropriate direction. Royal Festival Hall boxes look bang on.
|
|
|
|
Post by justfran on Oct 23, 2019 22:32:50 GMT
We were at my in-laws in Newcastle over the weekend, and I was reading the programme for upcoming show's at the city's Theatre Royal. According to the ticket-buying information, they have two rows of Premium seats (I think they call them superseats), Rows F and G in the stalls I think, that *do* have extra legroom, for 'a small premium'. (For On Your Feet, they are £53 vs £51 and £48 for the other good stalls seats) That's the way to do it! Yep that’s right about the “superseats” at the Theatre Royal. Best way I would describe them is that other people can get passed you and you don’t need to stand up, but in other rows you would need to stand to let people by. The actual seats are the same as all others. If it’s only a few £ then it’s worth paying for the legroom. |
|
19,793 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Oct 24, 2019 5:12:48 GMT
We were at my in-laws in Newcastle over the weekend, and I was reading the programme for upcoming show's at the city's Theatre Royal. According to the ticket-buying information, they have two rows of Premium seats (I think they call them superseats), Rows F and G in the stalls I think, that *do* have extra legroom, for 'a small premium'. (For On Your Feet, they are £53 vs £51 and £48 for the other good stalls seats) That's the way to do it! Yep that’s right about the “superseats” at the Theatre Royal. Best way I would describe them is that other people can get passed you and you don’t need to stand up, but in other rows you would need to stand to let people by. The actual seats are the same as all others. If it’s only a few £ then it’s worth paying for the legroom. If you have enough legroom to sit properly without needing to spread your legs, it gives everyone else in the row more space because you’re not taking up width between the seats. |
|
4,029 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Oct 24, 2019 9:32:13 GMT
In the case of the Royal Opera House that is precisely the case. Its horseshoe shape is because many of the audience were more interested in seeing the rest of the audience than the stage. That explains then. What I didn't understand at the weekend was so many very well-to-do types swishing their way to the ROH boxes, where they were going to spend 2 hours with their heads turned sideways. Madness.
Even the Coliseum boxes - presumably of the same turn-of-the-century era - face roughly the appropriate direction. Royal Festival Hall boxes look bang on.
Oh, I meant the original audiences when the ROH was first built in Georgian times, rather than the current audiences! I believe that the auditorium has always been horseshoe shaped, even though the current theatre is the third one (the first two both burned down). |
|
349 posts
|
Post by kimbahorel on Oct 24, 2019 9:42:30 GMT
When I was at Queens I loved the slips and I just before Les Mis Orginial closed I booked a seat and they decided to remove all the slips on one side (my side) for one show. So they "upgraded" everyone to seats in the dress and I was stuck with 4 seats in on row B of the dress. This seat is like £80-£100 and I could not see over the heads of the people in front of me. Becuase the the rake wasn't high as it is if you were in E or F and you have to look down to the stage. As a whole I NEVER book 2nd 3rd or 4th rows anyway unless its stalls becuase you look down. In my case I would have prefered i the people in front actually leaned.
Also Les Mis concert I was in J4 in the grand and sat next to people who paid online £100 for the seats next to me from a website. I would have felt sorry for them if they hadn't have whispered all the lyrics and talked though the show.
|
|
