Digital Lotteries...the new thing?- Page 4

[asmith0307]

Posted: 7/15/15 at 9:39pm

So, I did the new online lotto for Kinky Boots after doing the in person three times are there are positives and negatives to both. 

With the in person lotto (and this goes the same for me as rush) you actually get to know the people who are also trying to get tickets. Then when you see them in the theatre, is nice to say hi.

 

On the other hand, the online/digital lottos are so much easier to enter. I work until 6 most days, so it is difficult to enter the in person lotto since they have all usually passed (since they all insist on having theirs at the same times - the only one I ever knew to have an alternate time was If/Then which pulled half an hour later)

 

I'm not sure which I prefer at this point 

Updated On: 7/17/15 at 09:39 PM

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 12:25pm

Gentleman's Guide is next to add a digital lottery... in addition to their pre-existing rush. 

Seems as if Jujamcyn is all for the digital lotteries for each production. I wonder if Book of Mormon will be next. I know they have the Twitter lottery sometimes but I'm talking a full-out digital lottery everyday. 

Updated On: 7/17/15 at 12:25 PM

[gleek4114]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 1:16pm

I 100% do not care for digital lotteries. It takes all the fun and excitement out of winning cheap tickets. I think digital lotteries are way to easy. Part of the thrill was that you had to get there on time, in person, and physically get your name drawn in front of the other lottery patrons. Also, to echo what asmith0307 said, it's fun to chat with the other patrons and say hello, a digital lottery basically diminishes any aspect of that fun (at least in my opinion) interaction. Not to mention, in person lotteries never have as many entries as in person lotteries, which like I explained, getting there is part of the challenge. By going digital, anyone with a smart phone can enter from wherever they may be. 

[neonlightsxo]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 1:17pm

They're not EASY at all, that's the whole problem. The odds are near impossible.

[VotePeron]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 1:24pm

I loathe digital lotteries.

Also, AGGLM, $42 for a lottery? Have they seen their grosses?

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 2:16pm

That's the price of their pre-existing rush, so nothing new here. 

[Margo319]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 2:31pm

Yeah, I hate the concept of digital lotteries.  I think if you want cheap tickets, you should make the effort to go down to the theater.  Now, hundreds of people can enter, so the odds are nearly impossible.  I understand it's easier and less stressful for the people working at the theater though.  

[Crazy NooNooHead]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 2:57pm

I like the idea of a digital lottery, but I don't think it should completely replace the in-person lotteries. Like others have said, it's a lot less social (I've met some very cool people waiting for lottery/rush/standing room), and I think it takes some of the excitement away. I won the TodayTix lottery for On The Town, and of course I was excited about it, but getting a notification on my phone is way less thrilling than hearing someone call my name or the name of the person I entered with. I'd rather have it as an extra option instead of the only option.

[Justin D]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 3:40pm

Well I guess this locks out international visitors like myself who might not be able to activate roaming on my cell phone to send in the request or receive the notice of if I won or not.

[Broadway Joe]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 3:42pm

I love digital lotteries. Don't have to waste time standing around the theatre just to lose lol 

Plus while I live in NYC I'm not that close to the theatre district so heading there just to hopefully win a lotto isn't worth my time or money. 

[gleek4114]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 4:12pm

"They're not EASY at all, that's the whole problem. The odds are near impossible. "

 I meant that it's easy to enter but a whole lot harder to win. In person lotteries are a lot harder to enter (actually getting to the theatre), but easier to win because there are less people. I'd much rather put in the extra effort to get there if it meant that the odds of winning were greater.

[Phillypinto]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 4:26pm

I think digital lotteries are better for most people. Probably except for people who are close to the theaters, and can just enter everyday no harm no foul 

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 7/17/15 at 8:25pm

"Well I guess this locks out international visitors like myself who might not be able to activate roaming on my cell phone to send in the request or receive the notice of if I won or not."

 There is free wi-fi available all over this city. It's not hard to find and connect to any of those networks to submit your entry and check to see if you've won.

[StageStar2468]

Posted: 7/18/15 at 12:26am

MUCH prefer in person lotteries. Because there's a lot more effort, less people enter, so your odds are much better. I also personally like seeing how many others are entering to gauge how good your chances will be. Lotteries are also just fun. Sometimes you meet some really cool people and get to bond with fellow theatre people. I understand that online lotteries are more cost effective and can be good PR, but I would really like to see shows offer lotteries or rushes (which I prefer to both an online and in person lottery)

[Hairspray0901]

Posted: 8/6/15 at 2:38pm

Since my original post, where I stated that I think digital lotteries are a great idea - I am now completely changing my statement: I hate them! lol. I much prefer in-person lotteries since now basically anyone with an internet connection can enter, whether they're actually interested in going or not! I've entered the Something Rotten & Fun Home digital lotteries at least 15 times and have never won! I know other people in the same boat. Sigh. One day...

On Tuesday, however, a friend of mine won the Kinky Boots digital lottery for us! We both entered Kinky Boots, GGLAM, Fun Home & Something Rotten, plus, one of my friends entered those 4 for us as well. Out of our 12 total entries (plus trying for "more" entries by filling out the Jujamcyn survey and sharing the TodayTix lotto on social media) only one winner. I loved Kinky Boots and I'm so mad it took me so long to see it! We received front row of the left box which offered a great view. The people in row B (3 seats) never showed up so we ended up sitting one behind the other which was even better. But - as others have said, there's the con to a digital lottery. People win then they don't show up to claim their tickets! 

 

[artscallion]

Posted: 8/6/15 at 2:44pm

It now gives a ton more people a chance of winning. Of course that chance has now become the same as a snowball's chance in hell.

[StageStar2468]

Posted: 8/7/15 at 10:12am

^Exactly. I totally get that for some people who dont live as close, digital lotteries are much more convenient, but that "convenience" also means losing 99% of thr time (I don't know the actual percentages for each show, but it certainly can feel that slim) 

[asmith0307]

Posted: 10/29/15 at 11:09pm

Did anyone catch that Matilda switched to a $32 online lotto and $27 rush combo? I caught the mention in the TImes article (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/30/theater/cheap-broadway-tickets-can-be-a-matter-of-luck-timing-and-apps.html?smid=tw-nyttheater&smtyp=cur) and checked their website to be sure. 

[Sam2]

Posted: 11/1/15 at 12:53am

For those interested, the new musical School of Rock is holding on to to the in-person lottery system. I stopped by at the box office today and they confirmed it, totally forgot to ask how much those tickets would be, though. 

[liotte]

Posted: 1/16/16 at 8:19pm

I hate hate HATE digital lotteries. 

Hundreds, thousands (or hundreds of thousands at Hamilton) of people enter every digital lotto, every day. Not only are the lottos now very challenging to win, but people who win more than one pair of tickets only claim the ones for the show they will attend, and have just taken away tickets from someone who really wanted to win for the other show(s), which now go to the cancellation line, are sold full price, or are just wasted empty seats.

Someone mentioned that they needed 1 pair of tickets, and had 12 entries for 4 different shows. If lotteries are going to be digital, I'd hope it could be confined to one company running it, and you are only able to enter your name/email/log in through social media to avoid multiple email addresses for ONE show per day. Pick the one you want and you can only enter that lottery that day. Broadway direct is better, you have to claim your winning tickets with a credit card within an hour of receiving the email.. Too bad unclaimed tickets are just sold at the box office for face value rather than emailing another lotto entrant. 

At least the in person lottos are mostly at the same time, and people wanting those tickets are spread out at all the different theaters. I understand that online is good for people who work late, or live too far to come in just for a lotto, or those who don't want to put on pants to go outside. But now the odds suck for everyone, for every show. Bring back in person lotteries!! 

[mpkie]

Posted: 1/17/16 at 12:37am

I love love LOVE digital lotteries! I'm very excited that most shows are heading that direction. I think all lotteries, in-person or digital need to institute a policy that if you've won one before and accepted tickets, you can't enter again for X amount of time. That would make winners go away for a while, and boost losers chances to win the next lottery. Digital makes that easier to enforce, since it's done via computer system and you need to enter your name that matches your ID. 

 

I wouldn't even bother to bring Hamilton into this discussion, as that's an anomaly of a show. Their digital lottery is flawed. I do think there needs to be enforcement that only people who can physically accept the tickets will actually enter, with this show more than most. Plan to hop on a plane to get here to pick them up? Please go away. Each person should really be registering too, why not? You need an social media account signed up for the Socialtoaster lotteries.

 

I do think there's a lot of room for improvement though. As per above, there needs to be an easier way to reject tickets you know you can no longer use. This happened to me with MATILDA--I didn't feel well that day and wanted to send an email or something after the win but there was nowhere to reject the ticket. But it also should be easier for you to lock them in. Example: I won ON THE FEET and intended to go but was stuck in a meeting when I got the email, then had to jump right into another meeting, and there was no way for me to pay within the 60 min. Good thing is then the tickets are released to resale (and hopefully went to someone else as a winner??) But I haven't won either again since. :'(

 

It's interesting how different each of the digital lottery systems are (Broadway Direct, Socialtoaster, Turnkeysurveyor, and TodayTix). I would say TodayTix is the best interface and most user friendly, but it's the absolute worst for odds.

 

But really, this is all moot because the underlying issue is... they need to make theater more affordable in general. Shows are on average more affordable in London West End. That's why I'm much more of a fan of Under 30/35 programs. Well, the Under 35, for sure, because it's more time

Updated On: 1/17/16 at 12:37 AM

[Hairspray0901]

Posted: 1/17/16 at 1:08am

liotte said: "

Someone mentioned that they needed 1 pair of tickets, and had 12 entries for 4 different shows. If lotteries are going to be digital, I'd hope it could be confined to one company running it, and you are only able to enter your name/email/log in through social media to avoid multiple email addresses for ONE show per day. Pick the one you want and you can only enter that lottery that day. Broadway direct is better, you have to claim your winning tickets with a credit card within an hour of receiving the email.. Too bad unclaimed tickets are just sold at the box office for face value rather than emailing another lotto entrant. 

"

I still prefer in person lotteries, as I stated previously. However, since this was somewhat directed at me (I had "12 entries" in 4 lotteries); I'm going to defend this by saying that 

1. I didn't enter MY name multiple times with different emails. That wouldn't even work - they check ID. One entry per NAME, not email. :)

2. Having friends help (like I did) is just the same as having your friends help you at in person lotteries (which I have done in the past). If two of you win, and you only need 2 tickets, obviously the second winner declines. thus giving up the tickets to someone else. I see the flaw though in that the instance of digital, the unclaimed tickets don't always go to a lottery loser.

 

[liotte]

Posted: 1/17/16 at 10:41am

Hairspray- I'm not faulting/accusing you of anything. I 100% have had friends enter for me and I have entered for them. But at least if 10 friends enter a live lotto and you only need 1 pair of tickets, and 2 people win, you can say you don't need the other pair and they draw another name. 

With digital, all 10 people could have won, so you get your 1 pair, and the other 9 pairs of tickets now go unclaimed, so either they stay empty or sold at full face value at the box office. Another 9 pairs of people who really wanted to win the lotto don't get the chance. But if you really want to win, yes, you now have to enter every lotto, every day, and have all your friends enter for you too.  There definitely needs to be a better system. The 30 day rule is fine, the entering 1 lotto per day would be good, but all the theaters need to work together in order to enforce a system that will work.

When Rent started rush and then lotto, it was to make theater tickets affordable, especially to the young demographic they were targeting. Broadway insiders were the ones who knew about lotteries and how to get cheap tickets. I made some great friends in rush/lotto lines, and it was fun, especially to hear your name called in the crowd. And now digital lotteries have taken that Broadway community experience away.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 1/17/16 at 12:11pm

mpkie said: "II do think there's a lot of room for improvement though. As per above, there needs to be an easier way to reject tickets you know you can no longer use. "

 

Agreed. Also, I'm not sure I can get on board with the "you have to want to be there" mentality I see pop up in this debate. There are a lot of people sitting in nearby offices, in schools, who don't have money for the LIRR or NJ Transit, who probably "want" to be there more than at least a handful of people who are there entering in person -- they just have no way of trying to see the show even if they could make it by curtain. But ta-da! Digital lottos! The flawed equalizer!

 

Les Miz just started a digital lotto, but they never had one before (so there's no sense that they're removing something), AND they're keeping the rush policy, so I like that.

[NJ_BroadwayGirl]

Posted: 1/17/16 at 6:15pm

As a working professional with a regular job in NJ, I like that digital lotteries give me a chance to participate! Due to timing and geography, I certainly cannot go stand in an in-person lottery line at the theatre on a regular basis. But if I won a lottery, I could absolutely get to the theatre in time for the show.