Broadway Grosses: Week Ending 4/7/24- Page 4

[QueenAlice]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 12:51pm

Jarethan - If the production sold a substantial amount of tickets last week at $50 and their average ticket price is the same as other shows offering (much less) of a discount, that would indicate that the other tickets sold were for substaintially more money. We will know more in the coming weeks about how the show is doing at the box office without a one time flash sale offer.

[Wick3]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 1:09pm

Plus remember that shows in previews tend to get a number of comps from producers, thus lowering the average ticket price.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 1:31pm

bear88 said: "SonofRobbieJ said: "hearthemsing22 said: "SonofRobbieJ said: "When reading Broadway Flash's posts, does anyone else have the thought 'God, I hope they're wearing their helmet today to prevent further damage'?

Just me?"

Why so rude? Just block them. There's a handy dandy feature on here to do that."

Because it's too much fun reading their inanity. Plus, I think they're pretty much trolling at all times and I think that deserves a little rudeness."

Here’s the problem with that, and I’m not singling you out. A string of posts denouncing someone makes the entire thread unreadable. It becomes as tiresome as the person’s posts."

I mean...you are signaling me out. I don't care, but let's not be disingenuous. 

If my bitchy quip derailed this thread, I can take the hit. But there are people on this thread doing yeoman's work setting the record straight on a very successful Broadway producer. It's not too far afield for a thread on grosses capturing current productions of said producer.

But to get this back on topic, it will be interesting to see what kind of hit MERRILY takes when Groff is out. There may be a world where Groff can keep it afloat a bit longer if they pair him with, say, Darren Criss. Radcliffe is terrific in this, but Charley is probably the easiest of the principals to recast. The material is tour de force without the role being overly taxing physically or even vocally. Groff's work as Frank will be the very difficult thing to replace. 

Updated On: 4/10/24 at 01:31 PM

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 3:11pm

For Gatsby, I think the $50 price was any point in previews, and at least when I was there it didn't seem like a lot of people were taking advantage of it--yes, there were a lot of people in line, but compared to the size of the theater capacity on a nightly basis, I doubt it would've made a huge dent in the average price, unlike the Stereophonic deal.

I think the Hadestown topic is an interesting one, and it would be fascinating to do a case study on it.  From my own personal experience, it seems to have spread through the inventive staging, impressive singing (in a style that doesn't really sound like anything else in musical theater), and the way it tackles a traditional story in a new way (that also has a very specific vibe and style).  I was legitimately surprised at how excited people were for Eva Noblezada on Broadway again, and I'm not sure if it's just the early preview audience, but she seems to really have made a name for herself in Hadestown (in a way that Miss Saigon didn't quite do)

[Jarethan]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 3:15pm

QueenAlice said: "Jarethan - If the production sold a substantial amount of tickets last week at $50 and their average ticket price is the same as other shows offering (much less) of a discount, that would indicate that the other tickets sold were for substaintially more money. We will know more in the coming weeks about how the show is doing at the box office without a one time flash sale offer."

Good point.  Be interesting to see.

[hearthemsing22]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 4:11pm

SonofRobbieJ said: "bear88 said: "SonofRobbieJ said: "hearthemsing22 said: "SonofRobbieJ said: "When reading Broadway Flash's posts, does anyone else have the thought 'God, I hope they're wearing their helmet today to prevent further damage'?

Just me?"

Why so rude? Just block them. There's a handy dandy feature on here to do that."

Because it's too much fun reading their inanity. Plus, I think they're pretty much trolling at all times and I think that deserves a little rudeness."

Here’s the problem with that, and I’m not singling you out. A string of posts denouncing someone makes the entire thread unreadable. It becomes as tiresome as the person’s posts."

I mean...you are signaling me out. I don't care, but let's not be disingenuous.

If my bitchy quip derailed this thread, I can take the hit. But there are people on this thread doing yeoman's work setting the record straight on a very successful Broadway producer. It's not too far afield for a thread on grosses capturing current productions of said producer.

But to get this back on topic, it will be interesting to see what kind of hit MERRILY takes when Groff is out. There may be a world where Groff can keep it afloat a bit longer if they pair him with, say, Darren Criss. Radcliffe is terrific in this, but Charley is probably the easiest of the principals to recast. The material is tour de force without the role being overly taxing physically or even vocally. Groff's work as Frank will be the very difficult thing to replace."

And so they won't replace, and their July closing is final. Why so desperate for an extension?

[hork]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 4:36pm

hearthemsing22 said:

And so they won't replace, and their July closing is final. Why so desperate for an extension?"

The question is, why does it bother you when people talk about extensions?

[berniesb!tch]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 4:36pm

hearthemsing22 said: "SonofRobbieJ said: "bear88 said: "SonofRobbieJ said: "hearthemsing22 said: "SonofRobbieJ said: "When reading Broadway Flash's posts, does anyone else have the thought 'God, I hope they're wearing their helmet today to prevent further damage'?

Just me?"

Why so rude? Just block them. There's a handy dandy feature on here to do that."

Because it's too much fun reading their inanity. Plus, I think they're pretty much trolling at all times and I think that deserves a little rudeness."

Here’s the problem with that, and I’m not singling you out. A string of posts denouncing someone makes the entire thread unreadable. It becomes as tiresome as the person’s posts."

I mean...you are signaling me out. I don't care, but let's not be disingenuous.

If my bitchy quip derailed this thread, I can take the hit. But there are people on this thread doing yeoman's work setting the record straight on a very successful Broadway producer. It's not too far afield for a thread on grosses capturing current productions of said producer.

But to get this back on topic, it will be interesting to see what kind of hit MERRILY takes when Groff is out. There may be a world where Groff can keep it afloat a bit longer if they pair him with, say, Darren Criss. Radcliffe is terrific in this, but Charley is probably the easiest of the principals to recast. The material is tour de force without the role being overly taxing physically or even vocally. Groff's work as Frank will be the very difficult thing to replace."

And so they won't replace, and their July closing is final. Why so desperate for an extension?"

Why are YOU so desperate to egg them on regarding their feelings on a hypothetical extension. Seriously, why do you care? Just so you can be condescending and righteous? Are you a really committed troll and I am falling for your bait? You do this in nearly every thread you are a part of and it is so annoying. 

 

[hearthemsing22]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 4:39pm

hork said: "hearthemsing22 said:

And so they won't replace, and their July closing is final. Why so desperate for an extension?"

The question is, why does it bother you when people talk about extensions?"

I'll answer your question if people answer mine-aside from just saying "but omg the grosses are so gooood whyyyy not extennnnnddddd?" 

Updated On: 4/10/24 at 04:39 PM

[bear88]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 4:40pm

Re: Merrily. Short-term (three mid-week performances), I doubt Groff’s absences will have any larger box office impact than Radcliffe’s. But if the revival tried to carry on without Groff, that would be a challenge. Merrily, after all, has been ‘fixed’ for years, including in identical productions years before both in the U.S. and in England. What made it really work was Groff, placed at its center in what is (almost) a memory play. He has enough boyish charm as an actor to turn Frank into an almost sympathetic figure, and yet he’s able to play a certain hollowness and eagerness for the glamour of material success too. Groff’s Frank comes across less as a cad than a coward, who has a point about his friends’ unrealistic expectations of him. This is a hard trick to pull off.

Radcliffe is a delight as Charley, and his ability to attract non-theater people to the show should not be underestimated. But it always seems like the actor playing Charley tends to get a lot of plaudits. It’s the other major roles that have been tricky.

Re: Hadestown, Noblezada, Gatsby

I don’t have to look outside my own immediate family to find a big Eva Noblezada fan. Last summer, my daughter went to see Hadestown again on Broadway after loving her performance back in 2019. She has a fan base even if she and Jeremy Jordan won’t be able to draw non-theater folks. But if you combine them with the famous source material and a splashy production, that gives the new musical at least a little breathing room to build an audience.

Hadestown does have a look and sound that makes it feel both classic and unique, as well as adaptable to the replacement actors the producers are hiring to bring in new audiences or attract old ones to see it again. The ongoing success of Moulin Rouge! feels less surprising, given its old-school flashiness and movie predecessor. People come into the theater knowing the songs. Hadestown is an original show that doesn’t have those advantages but seems to have found new life. 

[berniesb!tch]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 4:48pm

hearthemsing22 said: "hork said: "hearthemsing22 said:

And so they won't replace, and their July closing is final. Why so desperate for an extension?"

The question is, why does it bother you when people talk about extensions?"

I'll answer your question if people answer mine-aside from just saying "but omg the grosses are so gooood whyyyy not extennnnnddddd?""

Sure - I will bite: From a producer standpoint (which I am not so take it with a grain of salt) I could see them wanting to extend because they could make more money and that is their only goal (whether you agree morally or not does not matter). Why would they not think about other names that could keep it going longer?

From an audience point: let's say this was my favorite show (it's not) and I loved the production (I did). Why would I as an audience member not want to see it possibly extended with other actors I find exciting. Why would that be so bad? 

Looking forward to your response.

 

Updated On: 4/10/24 at 04:48 PM

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 4:59pm

hearthemsing22 said: "And so they won't replace, and their July closing is final. Why so desperate for an extension?"

I very much do not care if they extend or not. I've seen it. I enjoyed it. But if there's money to be made, what reasonable producer wouldn't consider it? 

Feel free to block me. Unlike Broadway Flash you are not even a tiny bit entertaining. 

[hearthemsing22]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 5:44pm

SonofRobbieJ said: "hearthemsing22 said: "And so they won't replace, and their July closing is final. Why so desperate for an extension?"

I very much do not care if they extend or not. I've seen it. I enjoyed it. But if there's money to be made, what reasonable producer wouldn't consider it?

Feel free to block me. Unlike Broadway Flash you are not even a tiny bit entertaining."

I think because as someone else said, they would want to go out on a high note. Why bother casting new people when they couldn't even guarantee continued interest? All of the fans who want to see the show would have by now, wouldn't they? 

I don't comment here to be entertaining and neither are you, so that's one thing we actually have in common! 

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 4/10/24 at 8:53pm

MayAudraBlessYou2 said: "If there's discounts freely available for all dates, a customer says "eh, I'll get to this show if I have time. I really gotta make sure I can see this $250 show somehow instead"."

I feel differently. As long as it's not a limited run, I assume high ticket prices means demand is too high and I would do better waiting for more availability and better deals in the future. Whereas low grosses means you have to rush to see the show before it closes. Of course, there are shows that do not have enough appeal to general audiences regardless of how much you discount or paper, but that's a different matter.

[mridley2]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 12:33am

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, MayAudraBlessYou2

in my experience paper is used to fill the audience so the production (actors, production staff, etc) can hone their show and make it better with a fuller audience.  I do understand usually paper is last minute and I try to keep a lot of flexibility in my schedule to allow for this.  And don't forget paper services rely on discretion though the producers cannot guarantee that people will not "gossip" It just seems odd to me that these shows IN PREVIEWS would rather play to a 40-50% house rather than offering some comps.  especially at critics performances.

I'm not a producer and I understand Broadway is a business, but still.  And yes I am looking for free shows. Everyone has the same access to papering services that I do. Sign up. pay a fee. check the web site throughout the day looking for interesting/compelling show offers.  I don't see this as being greedy at all.

 

 

[EDSOSLO858]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 12:49am

If a show is selling (fairly) well, I won’t be ashamed to admit I was comped if that’s how I got to see it. 

 

[MayAudraBlessYou2]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 10:09am

VintageSnarker said: "MayAudraBlessYou2 said: "If there's discounts freely available for all dates, a customer says "eh, I'll get to this show if I have time. I really gotta make sure I can see this $250 show somehow instead"."

I feel differently. As long as it's not a limited run, I assume high ticket prices means demand is too high and I would do better waiting for more availability and better deals in the future. Whereas low grosses means you have to rush to see the show before it closes. Of course, there are shows that do not have enough appeal to general audiences regardless of how much you discount or paper, but that's a different matter."

But you are approaching the scenario as a local theater fan. Your average ticket buyer is definitely not paying attention to grosses. They are not tapped in to the ebbs and flows of pricing structures. Having a high price makes people associate the product with quality.

An example: I asked my late partner if he wanted to attend The Bands Visit with me because it was in previews and dates popped up on TDF. He was unfamiliar with any details about the show but said "Oh but why is it only $47 dollars? It must not be any good". This was only because cheap tickets were readily available. 

I do feel quite confident in what I'm saying, as someone with 18 years of experience in ticketing. Pre-pandemic, I would be looking around a week out from a performance date to list with papering services if the house needed a boost. But now, if I list that far in advance on multiple services...full price sales seem to dry up and it feels impossible to move inventory. Yet, if I don't list on papering services, that house that needs a boost often suddenly fills up at full price just 2 days before the show. So for papering we have pivoted to very last minute listings, usually the day or 2 prior. AND we experimented with lowering the sales threshold which activates dynamic pricing. Low and behold, once the ticket prices went up, even just a tiny bit, sales picked up. People see the higher price and think "I've got to jump on this." We are in a totally new world of audience buying habits for theater, and it truly is "adapt now or die." And this means we will see, and already have seen, a markedly different approach to papering and discounts. 

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 10:26am

MayAudraBlessYou2 said: "VintageSnarker said: "MayAudraBlessYou2 said: "If there's discounts freely available for all dates, a customer says "eh, I'll get to this show if I have time. I really gotta make sure I can see this $250 show somehow instead"."

I feel differently. As long as it's not a limited run, I assume high ticket prices means demand is too high and I would do better waiting for more availability and better deals in the future. Whereas low grosses means you have to rush to see the show before it closes. Of course, there are shows that do not have enough appeal to general audiences regardless of how much you discount or paper, but that's a different matter."

But you are approaching the scenario as a local theater fan. Your average ticket buyer is definitely not paying attention to grosses. They are not tapped in to the ebbs and flows of pricing structures. Having a high price makes people associate the product with quality.

An example:I asked my late partner if he wanted to attend The Bands Visit with me because it was in previews and dates popped up on TDF. He was unfamiliar with any details about the show but said "Oh but why is it only $47 dollars? It must not be any good". This was only because cheap tickets were readily available.

I do feel quite confident in what I'm saying, as someone with 18 years of experience in ticketing. Pre-pandemic, Iwould be looking around a week out from a performance date to list with papering services if the house needed a boost. But now, if I list that far in advance on multiple services...full price sales seem to dry up and it feels impossible to move inventory. Yet, if I don't list on papering services, that house that needs a boost often suddenly fills up at full price just 2 days before the show. So for papering we have pivoted to very last minute listings, usually the day or 2 prior. AND we experimented with lowering the sales threshold which activates dynamic pricing. Low and behold, once the ticket prices went up, even just a tiny bit, sales picked up. People see the higher price and think "I've got to jump on this." We are in a totally new world of audience buying habits for theater, and it truly is "adapt now or die." And this means we will see, and already have seen, a markedly different approach to papering and discounts."

Thanks for all of your insight, MayAudraBlessYou2! I do a monthly show here in the city that's been running for over 10 years now and our experience has reflected what you said about last-minute ticket buying. Pre-pandemic, we used to have heavily sold or sold out shows at least a week or two before the performance. Now, we are still hitting are targets consistently but maybe a day or two before. Even the day of. I'm glad what we have felt anecdotally is backed up by your experience. I've learned to relax about it. Others are still a little anxious when we see the numbers two days before the show.  

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 3:41pm

MayAudraBlessYou2 said: "But now, if I list that far in advance on multiple services...full price sales seem to dry up and it feels impossible to move inventory. Yet, if I don't list on papering services, that house that needs a boost often suddenly fills up at full price just 2 days before the show. So for papering we have pivoted to very last minute listings, usually the day or 2 prior. AND we experimented with lowering the sales threshold which activates dynamic pricing. Low and behold, once the ticket prices went up, even just a tiny bit, sales picked up."

I'm not disagreeing with the general buying habits of audiences, just adding in my two cents. I do think there's a middle ground. I'm not sure the high prices are increasing demand for Cabaret but I do think having a show on all the papering services is a bad look. I think the perception of weakness is more detrimental than high ticket prices are beneficial as a sign of quality. Or Mr. Saturday Night would have done better. 

Personally, with so many shows, especially adding in off-Broadway and concerts, anything with a daunting price just puts me off. I'd never buy one $400 ticket over the many shows I could potentially see for the cost of that one ticket when there's so much to choose from. 

[hearthemsing22]

Posted: 4/11/24 at 5:10pm

kdogg36 said: "hearthemsing22 said: "People: Come on, bring back "x" show!!

Show comes back

People: No! We want new work!

Show announces it's for a limited run, or implies their stars are there for a limited time

People: why??? extend!!!!!

Make up your friggin minds people"

This is only a validargument if you can find specific individuals who have supported all of these opposing views. You can't make the point byappealing to unspecified "People." We all know there are lots of "people" longing for revivals of the classis and other "people" looking for new work - no contradiction there."

Oh get off your high horse. What qualifies you to tell me whether or not my comment is valid? Back off.