#51
Posted: 3/13/11 at 12:51pm
Except those shows weren't evicted. They closed because they weren't selling well and the producers closed them. So your argument is moot.
American Idiot to close April 24th — Page 3
#52
Posted: 3/13/11 at 12:55pm
wcoyote- You're laughing at me and then saying exactly what I said? You said a show gets kicked out because it is not paying its rent, and gave the example of someone not paying their home mortgage. I responded to say that even when a show starts to struggle it is still paying its bills and that is why the theater owner does not kick it out right away. You responded by basically agreeing and explaining in more detail why I was right. Why are you laughing?
Where is this "fact" coming from? I can think of many cases where prime theatres sat vacant for months after long running shows were forced to close after falling blow the agreed-upon stop clause figure.
That is not at all what I said. Yes, shows should close when they are no longer making money, and theaters sit empty for months. There are times when the theater owner evicts the show, HOWEVER, the majority of the time it is the producer's decision to close. The few times a show is evicted, it is almost always because there is another, potentially more profitable, show waiting for the theater.
My point was, the producers and the theater owners are often at odds when a show starts to struggle. It is in the theater owner's interest to have a show in the theater paying rent for as long as possible. It is in the producer's interest (sometimes) to close right away and prevent any further losses.
ps- Thanks tourboi
Where is this "fact" coming from? I can think of many cases where prime theatres sat vacant for months after long running shows were forced to close after falling blow the agreed-upon stop clause figure.
That is not at all what I said. Yes, shows should close when they are no longer making money, and theaters sit empty for months. There are times when the theater owner evicts the show, HOWEVER, the majority of the time it is the producer's decision to close. The few times a show is evicted, it is almost always because there is another, potentially more profitable, show waiting for the theater.
My point was, the producers and the theater owners are often at odds when a show starts to struggle. It is in the theater owner's interest to have a show in the theater paying rent for as long as possible. It is in the producer's interest (sometimes) to close right away and prevent any further losses.
ps- Thanks tourboi
Nothing matters but knowing nothing matters. ~ Wicked
Everything in life is only for now. ~ Avenue Q
There is no future, there is no past. I live this moment as my last. ~ Rent
"He's a tramp, but I love him."
Everything in life is only for now. ~ Avenue Q
There is no future, there is no past. I live this moment as my last. ~ Rent
Updated On: 3/13/11 at 12:55 PM
#54
Posted: 3/13/11 at 3:38pm
So you consider a reduction in rent and fees below their contractual agreement (for a short period to see if business projections improve) to be paying the bills? Do you think these reductions are forgiven or taken out of their bond and settlements on the back end? The owner takes close notice of the amount of that back end settlement and pulls the plug if the producer isn't as inclined. Again, your're naive to think otherwise.
#55
Posted: 3/13/11 at 3:52pm
That's not what Yero is saying.
Yero is saying that often if the venue has NOTHING booked or available to BE booked that they'll try and work with the producer to keep it going.
Yero is saying that often if the venue has NOTHING booked or available to BE booked that they'll try and work with the producer to keep it going.
#56
Posted: 3/13/11 at 4:03pm
You need to refer to Yeros original statement to understand the substance of my responses.
(Yero stated - I don't know this case, but in general, no theater owner would evict a show if they didn't have another show waiting in the wings. A paying tenant (even one that isn't making as profit) is better than no tenant.
Sorry - this just isn't the norm
(Yero stated - I don't know this case, but in general, no theater owner would evict a show if they didn't have another show waiting in the wings. A paying tenant (even one that isn't making as profit) is better than no tenant.
Sorry - this just isn't the norm
#57
Posted: 3/13/11 at 5:44pm
If there's no show coming in, a theatre owner will most of the time try to meet the producer halfway, or work with them to keep the show around a little longer while they seek another booking.
BUT most of the time if things are that dire the producer will want to just close the show.
BUT most of the time if things are that dire the producer will want to just close the show.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95