SIDE SHOW closing January 4th- Page 4

[jennaisjamazing]

Posted: 12/12/14 at 6:45pm

Do you think that shows that open in the fall (September-December) have a harder time staying open than shows that open in the spring? To me, whenever I hear of shows opening in the fall, I find that they are much harder sells and tend to close prematurely (Big Fish, Bonnie and Clyde). Of course shows that open in the spring can close prematurely as well (Bridges), and those in the fall can succeed.

But to me there's this weird trend that shows that open in the fall close earlier and in turn don't do well in award season. Anyone find that also?

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 12/12/14 at 6:52pm

Bonnie & Clyde closed prematurely due to 1 word - Wildhorn

Big Fish did not get the "money" reviews in NY even though it did get good notices in Chicago. Add to that, it was at the Simon where, for a few years now, the theater is box office poison to musicals opening there.

Updated On: 12/12/14 at 06:52 PM

[theatregeek6]

Posted: 12/12/14 at 6:59pm

Sad. But I kinda understand that this just won't bring in the tourist money. The production had great values but you need to be commercial

We need a better financial model for off Broadway so shows like this can have aide


Glad I saw it

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/12/14 at 8:16pm

As for the "cursed" January 4 date, just looked and the sisters' page says: "On 4 January 1969, after they failed to report to work, their boss called the police. The twins were found dead in their home, victims of the Hong Kong flu. According to a forensic investigation, Daisy died first; Violet died between two and four days later"

So, they didn't even die on the 4th. They were found dead on the 4th.

Updated On: 12/12/14 at 08:16 PM

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/12/14 at 8:27pm

Why does everyone talk about this stuff like it is rare for a show to close?! It is actually rare for a show to find its audience, make money, and stay open. The shows that close are the vast majority of shows. If anyone knew the secret to opening a hit, they would do it all the time. It seems easy on here, since, we just get to make up all of the other factors that support our theory.

Saying this show would have a better chance if it opened in the spring is really meaning it also then has to win (not be nominated for, but win) Tony Awards. So, that seems like a pretty amazing amount of things to have to line up beyond the time of year.

And, really, we're saying it has to win not just any ol' Tony, but Best Revival. If the performers, musicians, or creative team won awards, it wouldn't be as important as Best Revival. Bridges closed right after it wasn't nominated for Best Musical, Kelli and JRB wouldn't have been enough to push it over the top.

[ARTc3]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 1:35pm

I posted something similar in another thread, but I'd like to add it here...

I saw Side Show last night 12 December and it was brilliant. There is no artistic reason that this show should close. I would like to share with you my story about getting tickets though as I believe it might shed some insight into why Side Show is closing.

I live in New York and more often than not, I purchase my tickets at the box office. This is the story of my four attempts to purchase tickets at the box office and numerous attempts online.

First, I should own up: I am a seat snob. I prefer orchestra over mezzanine and I won't sit in the extreme sides of the theater. In fact, I rarely will sit more than the pair on the aisle if its on the side. I want to sit in excellent seats (orchestra center rows D - K). I get that discount codes more often than not, get you seats starting in row L of the orchestra. I also understand that today, full price is also a struggle to get great seats as most Producers try and sell the bulk of the center orchestra at premium prices.

I am seriously an opponent to the current pricing schemes of many of today's Broadway Producers. As I was very excited about the new production of Side Show, my attempts started as soon as ticket sales were announced. Of course, I have access to many of the discount codes and I started by trying to purchase online using one of these codes. No go. The best I could find searching online were side orchestra or the very back. Not for me.

Okay, Side Show meant enough to me that I would splurge and spend full price. No go. Despite the fact that week after week the house was selling at around 60% capacity, the best full price could offer me was row O or further back. WTF!?

I went on 3 occasions to the box office and was turned away when I simple requested ANY day (including months out), full price, orchestra center, rows D - K.

The box office staff were very pleasant, and apologized for not being able to sell me a seat, explaining that this was the policy of the Producers. I kept walking away. Finally, with closing notices, I went last night and said, I am here for a premium cancelation (at full price) for tonight's performance. That they were able to accommodate and I and my partner ended sitting in row D, orchestra center.

Why would Producers not allow the sale of seats at full price when they were obviously not selling at premium? I just don't get it. It is clear to me that full price is no longer full price, but just a section behind premium (or the first two rows).

I hope that the Producers of Side Show read this. I blame Side Show's failure squarely on you.

Updated On: 12/13/14 at 01:35 PM

[Smaxie]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 1:54pm

>And, really, we're saying it has to win not just any ol' Tony, but Best Revival. If the performers, musicians, or creative team won awards, it wouldn't be as important as Best Revival.<

The Best Revival of a Musical Tony Award does almost nothing for business. It doesn't hurt to win it, of course, but it doesn't help much either. If a show is holding on in the hopes of winning the Best Revival Tony, it's a fool's errand. If a show is not connecting with or finding its audience, the Revival Tony won't do a thing to change that fate. Best Musical, Best Play and the Leading Actor/Actress Tonys have much more clout. Even though we all care about the outcome, "revival" just means "old" to general audiences.

[delongpre]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 2:50pm

I had purchased tickets for the show on Jan 14th and got an email telling me to "exchange" those cancelled seats for new seats. I tried to do it online but had trouble so I called in. After trying to get the guy to access the great seats I was seeing online, he found some that were acceptable to me. He RETURNED my tickets to my credit card and asked for me to repay for the new tickets. Is this the usual procedure when EXCHANGING tickets? I never heard of this before.

Since the money for the return DID NOT go directly back to my card, I am unable to buy the EXCHANGE seats now. I have to wait 3 or 4 days before I can get tickets again. Who knows what will be available at that time. That seems a bit inconvenient and unfair. What happened to "when can you go? ok, your new seats will be emailed to you."

Is this really how things work with telecharge?

[gstrus2]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 3:20pm

Yes, Telecharge makes you get a refund and buy new tickets and the refund comes sooner after (a few business days).

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 3:37pm

Art, that is lame as hell, Im so sorry for your ridiculous, unnecessarily difficult experience. Perhaps if they made it a little easier for people to get tickets, they would not be closing.

[binau]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 4:37pm

EDIT: Nevermind, I think this has been posted in another thread.

Not sure if this has been posted, but the producers didn't 'cut their losses' - they were kicked out by the theatre

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/13/theater/side-show-reportedly-to-end-broadway-run-in-january.html?_r=0

Updated On: 12/13/14 at 04:37 PM

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 4:51pm

"Jack Tantleff, the musical’s creative supervisor, said on Friday that declining interest among ticket buyers in “serious musicals — musicals with a quote-unquote big idea” was another factor that hurt the show, and cited similar box office difficulties for Broadway musicals like “The Scottsboro Boys” (which dealt with racism) and “Parade” (anti-Semitism).

“When it comes to musicals, if the perception — not the reality, but the perception — is that this will be challenging for me to sit through, it seems to hugely affect ticket sales,” Mr. Tantleff said."

That's the most depressing thing I have read in a very long time. Updated On: 12/13/14 at 04:51 PM

[binau]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 4:56pm

"Why would Producers not allow the sale of seats at full price when they were obviously not selling at premium? I just don't get it. It is clear to me that full price is no longer full price, but just a section behind premium (or the first two rows).

I hope that the Producers of Side Show read this. I blame Side Show's failure squarely on you. "

This has annoyed me for a very long time too (it's not just Side Show). Premium tickets don't really work when no one is buying them - the original purpose as far as I understand was to prevent ticket scalping. It's working perfectly for shows like THE BOOK OF MORMON.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 6:54pm

But not for the majority of shows trying to make it.

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 6:59pm

It is a bit strange to cling to something having premium value that seemingly no one even wants for regular price.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 12/13/14 at 7:49pm

No matter what this was doomed to close unless it got universal raves which it did not. It might have run longer but it still would have flopped for many reasons.

We can all agree , like outdated milk, premium prices have outlived their shelf life.

Updated On: 12/13/14 at 07:49 PM

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/14/14 at 12:10am

"We can all agree , like outdated milk, premium prices have outlived their shelf life."

I think a lot of high-demand shows would disagree with you on that point. The problem is when struggling shows make it more difficult for people to buy, since they still think they have 12 solid center orchestra row, and two-seats on the side orchestra aisles for the high rollers.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/14/14 at 6:53am

The premium seats thing reminds me of what I witnessed in the wine section of a grocery store, about 2 years ago. The clerk was helping someone select something, when a man barreled in, cut them off, said "I'm in a hurry. I need a bottle of red wine for $75. Gimme something good." The clerk didn't know how to handle the rude interruption, and the man pushed on, "I'm paying seventy-five bucks, so take me first." The assumption of this Master of the Universe was: money talks. It ultimately did, as he was immediately given a seventy dollar bottle of wine -- no questions -- and ushered to the register. Sometimes, I see this as the new world order. Not new behavior, but its acceptance as a viable transcendence of etiquette is decidedly new. So it's ironic that premium seats for a musical that can't sell even half price seats are still reserved. Someone could walk in. Somebody could say "Give me a good seat. I'm paying more." It's rather ridiculous, yet in 2014 it makes perfect sense, doesn't it?

Updated On: 12/14/14 at 06:53 AM

[Monty12112]

Posted: 12/21/14 at 9:53am

Saw the show yesterday and sad to see it going. I would say it's definitely in my top favorite shows I have seen. Great performances and costume designs. I definitely recommend seeing it before it closes.

[Marlothom]

Posted: 12/21/14 at 10:23am

Wrapping up a 3 show weekend (plus Mariah Carey) - saw this on Friday night - fourth row center. I saw the original back in the day and can't say I enjoyed this revival more. Maybe it is because I saw the original and found it odd when they repurposed the songs/melodies. However, solid show - sad to see it go. Great performances, loved the production value though I definitely missed me some Alice Ripley belting. SPOILER: the most power moment for me was when Daisy and Violet broke apart for the end of I Will Never Leave You - that moment will stick with me for a while.

Overall, I thought Condon sacrificed some of the stronger theatrical bits from the original in order to add more bits related to the real Hilton sisters (he did the same thing in Dreamgirls where he just flat out made the Dreams the Supremes). Also didn't like how they made Terry a power-hungry agent.

[Noel&Cole]

Posted: 12/22/14 at 1:05am

The production was beautifully executed with RAVES to match... just weird that it seemed to sell exactly the same pre reviews as post reviews. This really showed the lack power by the critics today.

[Robbie2]

Posted: 12/22/14 at 2:20am

The production was beautifully executed with RAVES to match... just weird that it seemed to sell exactly the same pre reviews as post reviews.

---

I blame the producers and their marketing team for its failure not thinking out of the box and not doing anything to market a difficult freak concept...being not commercial. Tourists had no idea what it was about and stayed away as concierges-ticket agents basically did not sell the show. (I say this because I have a concierge friend at a Times Square hotel). Also, they put it in one of the largest theaters on Broadway...selling an average of only 800 seats a night out of 1300 reduced from 1700 seats. Sad as it should have lasted till the Tony awards!

Updated On: 12/22/14 at 02:20 AM

[Melissa25]

Posted: 12/22/14 at 5:06am

"It is a bit strange to cling to something having premium value that seemingly no one even wants for regular price."

This.

Typically around this time of year I would have a large percentage of the new seasons shows already purchased. With premium pricing taking over what appears to be 70% of the orchestra and first two rows of center Mezzanine, I just don't bother that much anymore. I wait and as a result see less shows as a result.
Hey Producers, "you get what you pay for" works both ways.

[newintown]

Posted: 12/22/14 at 10:08am

"I blame the producers and their marketing team for its failure not thinking out of the box and not doing anything to market a difficult freak concept..."

It's an odd urge, this one to blame everything but the show itself for failure. Side Show has failed financially twice now; it would seem clear that it's just not a show many people want to see.

It's not the marketing team's fault every time a show flops. They can saturate newspapers, tv shows, sides of buses, and everything else, and commercial audiences will still stay away from a show they suspect they won't enjoy.

[AntV]

Posted: 12/22/14 at 10:26am

The marketing team has done everything they could to hide the freak angle of the show and for a show that's all about accepting who you are, it's pretty disgusting that they did that. How out of touch could they be to not realize, based on the AHS success, that people would actually want to see a show about freaks? Instead they just launched some generic campaign that intererested nobody. It deserves to close and the marketing team deserves to be solely blamed for that very reason.