http://psychicinfection.blogspot.com/2013/05/another-potential-tony-voter-problem.html
Naive if you think nominations and awards are voted purely on merit. Many factors (including these) have already come into play.
Interesting post, and I agree, this is a bad precedent.
Oh, good god.
The NOMINATORS have already seen the show. The voters have not. Two different pools of people. I highly doubt the nominators worry: gee, my voting colleagues might not be able to see this show -- the one we don't deem as very good, or at least good enough.
Furthermore, if its this huge mega hit, already sold out for months, they don't NEED a Tony to extend. This is a business, while awards are nice (and certainly help some shows succeed) they are hardly necessary. Look how many shows close in spite of Tony wins (and nominations).
Understudy Joined: 3/22/13
Like dramamama said, do you think the nominators are thinking to themselves, "My buddies want free tickets to a show I've already seen, so I'm going to nominate it so my buddies can get free tickets?" There are a lot of factors that go into deciding the nominees besides artistic merit, but that one is a bit nutty.
Their buddies are people in the industry who know the early buzz and have connections. They know what the hot shows are and how to get tickets for them. And has there been a show for which you could not get house seats that also isn't Tony nomination worthy in ANY category? Shows that don't have good word of mouth aren't white-hot for that long (A Steady Rain, Three Days of Rain, etc).
And shows have turned down the chance to be Tony-eligible to avoid giving away free tickets (Hugh Jackman's recent show, for example). Like dramamama said, it's a business.
Methinks the OP is someone (like NewYorkTheater) who could care less about what anyone thinks. S/he just wants folks to read his/her blog. The fact that he hasn't been back to DISUSS is rather proof of that.
I think this is the second time I've looked at this blog (from it being posted here) and it will be the last. The other one was just as insipid.
Added: Post stalking the OP....he has made FIVE posts here over the last few years. EVERY ONE of them is nothing but a link to his own blog. Just because one CAN "publish" doesn't mean one SHOULD.
Videos