difference between equity and non equity tours- Page 3

[AndAllThatJazz22]

Posted: 4/12/09 at 8:45am

-Whoa Whoa there. The reason "producers" don't book shows into smaller-town venues for "less than a week" is because your small town isn't the only stop on the tour-

Neither is your big city buddy-o.

First of all, BWayJunkie nor I never said "Equity tours should go to small towns for less than a week". I said they should do shorter runs in small towns. For an equity tour, a week is a short run. For a small town, a week is a long run!!!

-Actors/musicians/crew, by contract, need to get paid for the WEEK, so playing three days instead of six sucks money right out of the operating budget, with no return.-

Then according to that post, there is no financial resason why an equity tour can't play for six days in a smaller market.




Bottom line is, it really isn't supposed to be about money. It's supposed to be about getting a show to people all over the country. I understand that there are financial and technical blocks in the way. Technical blocks are difficult, if not impossible to overcome. If a show is too big for a venue, that's that. The show can not fit, therefore the show can't play in the venue. Now I'm not sure if I'm missing something you posted, but based on what I read... an equity tour could do a 6 day run in a small town and make some money but they choose not to. And in case I misread something and there is some other financial block, an equity tour that has toured at least 3 years and made some money already can go to at least 1 small town a year for a 6 day run and stomach loosing a little moey (because the amount they lost in one town doesn't hold a candle to the amount they porfited over-all) but they choose not to, even though it's supposed to be about getting a show to people all over the nation. Not JUST money.


The reason why I'm not saying that EVERY show should stop in a ton of small towns for 3 day runs is because... jeez, you can't throw your money in a hole!!! But you mean to tell me that a great amount of tours can't stop in one small town a year and stomach the loss of a little money?

Updated On: 4/12/09 at 08:45 AM

[PitPro2004]

Posted: 4/12/09 at 8:23pm

This is by far the best thread I've ever read on this list.

My worthless two cents...

1.All actors are non union until they get that lucky break; but simply because you become Equity doesn't necessarily mean you are good. It hopefully means you got better.

2. I am a veteran of 6 non union tours and on almost every single one I was treated like royalty. Between Troika, Dodger/Big League and (hock, spit) Jerry Kravat Entertainment, I saw some of the most amazing places this world has to offer. I was priviledged to work with some of the biggest names on Broadway. And I always made wonderful money. Only slightly less than Union believe it or not. I played both A list and B list cities and nothing made me more happier or grateful to be working than when someone who is 250 miles from a major city came to see my show and thanked me for coming to their small town in the middle of nowhere. That's worth just as much as my paycheck to me.

Let's take our apples and oranges opinions of non Eq and Equity and make a delicious fruit salad out of all of them! The biggest problem the arts face right now are funding cuts in the schools, less endowment money and smaller crowds to the theaters. I've already lost enough work simply because of the economy. That's the biggest problem if you ask me...

[AndAllThatJazz22]

Posted: 4/12/09 at 8:39pm

^ Wonderful post :)

[Byron Abens]

Posted: 4/12/09 at 10:02pm

Many times the length of a tour's run in a particular venue is decided by the venue itself. True, many Equity tours won't be willing to book a show for less than a week's run, but many of the smaller "B" venues aren't willing to book a show for more than three days tops.

I did a NETworks tour right out of undergrad way back when. It has given me a much better personal perspective now as an Equity member when this issue comes up. The tours do provide a great experience for both young (for the most part) actors as well as some of these smaller cities. My big issue now is when a show sends its first national out non-union, and is booked into the large venues alongside Equity tours and is billed as "direct from Broadway" (as others have stated).

PitPro, I am going to assume that you are a musician based on your profile name, and if I am wrong I apologize. Musicians and technicians often are making much more than the actors on the non-union tours. Yes, there were some who had good agents and were therefore making better money, but many of these direct from college kids who they rely on to fill their casts are not making anything near what a union member is guaranteed as a minimum.

On a slight side note, it was very encouraging to hear the recent announcement that NETworks and IATSE had reached an agreement and that all crew members on their shows will soon be union members.

[AndAllThatJazz22]

Posted: 4/13/09 at 9:39am

Honestly, I don't even think it is right for an Equity tour to use the term 'Direct from Broadway'. It makes it sound as if they took all the sets, actors, and orchestra members from the broadway production... stuck them in a bus and sent them on tour across the country.

[LadyDramaturg2]

Posted: 4/13/09 at 1:15pm

Egads, allthatjazz, I misunderstood something.

I misinterpreted the reference to a "shorter" run to mean less than a week -- because tours I'm thinking of do many 1-week stops, with longer ones (in Toronto, or Chicago, etc.) sprinkled in.

And you're absolutely right; if the show has been touring for sometime, and the original capitalization expenses have been covered, the tour could then afford to run at a lower cost, and benefit towns that don't usually have the opportunity for a booking (for whatever reason).

Eeek. I wasn't being all my-town-is-bigger-than-your-town. I was just trying to point out that the putting-a-tour-together job is limited by issues that are not all greedy-producer related.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 4/13/09 at 1:25pm

The costs of loading in and loading out a show can also dictate the length the show is in a particular city. Most theaters book the show for a certain length of time based on demand and profitability. When you're dealing with larger markets such as LA, Chicago, San Francisco and Boston, you have a two-way booking (the producer initiates the booking and/or length of run) and negotiates with theaterowners.

As for non-union v. union, the odds are that the union tour will be better produced with better talent. I've only seen two non-union tours where the cast was on par with its equity counterparts (Miss Saigon and The Music Man). Unfortunately, its sets were chepaly made and looked little more than something a big-budgeted high school could produce. Other non-equity tours usually had one or two talented castmembers while the rest were unmemorable. While an equity tour doesn't guarantee quality, you have a better chance at a good quality show than you do with a non-equity cast.

[AndAllThatJazz22]

Posted: 4/13/09 at 1:39pm

LadyDramaturg2, sorry if I came off snappy I just get really passionate about my opinions, especially when its about the equity tours in small towns!!! I did like your post a lo actually, I didn't know about how the musicians need to be payed for a week, that actually explains a lot. I just feel like at some point, equity tours can go to a small town.

[PitPro2004]

Posted: 4/13/09 at 6:55pm

"PitPro, I am going to assume that you are a musician based on your profile name, and if I am wrong I apologize. Musicians and technicians often are making much more than the actors on the non-union tours. Yes, there were some who had good agents and were therefore making better money, but many of these direct from college kids who they rely on to fill their casts are not making anything near what a union member is guaranteed as a minimum."

Yes, Byron I am and you are absolutely right about the casts. I guess I was very fortunate with all of my touring because the paychecks were relevant for the most part, even though they were non-union. The dancers were ecstatic to be making what they did because they had great bread coming in, as did the tech's for once. The actors got addition perks because Troika made sure every now and then that our leads got interviewed, got nights off, and got some exposure that you would never think would have happened in a non union situation. Our casts were on tv quite regularly and we were constantly reviewed. Even the pit got mentioned in a few reviews; you could have knocked me over with a feather!!

Obviously, I can only speak for my experience, but the non union tours were just amazing. I must have come along at a very fortunate time in life when the producers actually gave a darn. (smile).

[Byron Abens]

Posted: 4/14/09 at 2:19am

I think as long as you stick with the big three (NETworks, Big League, and Troika) and avoid the smaller companies you are going to be treated fairly well on the road. I know I certainly enjoyed my time with NETworks, and would be more than happy to go out with them again now as part of the SM team on one of their Equity tours.

One of my other pet peeves are with the union members who scab and do the non-union tours (both actors and stage managers), and I'm happy that Equity has been cracking down on them more and more.

[TimeSquare3]

Posted: 4/14/09 at 2:27am

Byron what tours have you done with NETworks?

[Byron Abens]

Posted: 4/14/09 at 2:35am

I was part of stage management for the 02-03 Cinderella. I got my Equity card not long after leaving the tour, so was not able to go back out with anything the next season, and since their Equity tours are pulling from the Broadway stage managers, I haven't worked my way back in yet to be able to go out with them since.