Avenue Q kicked out of golden theater

[saveusmike]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:36pm

I am going to keep the cast memebers names private just incase this wasnt meant to be told but..

I am friends with a Q cast member and I was told that Avenue Q just didnt decide to end its run the golden theater just did not want it there anymore.

Apparently a play will be coming to the theater after Q closes, with Julia Stiles and someone else ( i forgot sorry) and the theater feels that a play with 2 "names" and no discounted tickets will gross a fortune even with a limited run.

I was always under the impression that Q was making a boat load of cash since it reccouped a while back but I was told that discounted tickets really hurt the show and they almost NEVER sell any full prices tickets anymore.
So Q is getting kicked out of the Golden Theater for another show.


if this information is somehow already out their then I apologize if not, I thought you all would find this interesting!

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:38pm

Somebody save us, 'cause I don't like the jive this "Mike" is talkin'.

[blaxx]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:38pm

Old news, the plays is Mamet's Oleanna and Q had a good run, but wasn't making money.

[Eris0303]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:40pm

How can anyone forget Bill Pullman? Gawh!

I am going to keep the cast memebers names private just incase this wasnt meant to be told but..

When in doubt keep your mouth shut and your fingers still.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:42pm

"Old news, the plays is Mamet's Oleanna and Q had a good run, but wasn't making money."

Yes it was. Just not enough money to justify running any longer. It was originally supposed to close in April, but sales picked up.

"the golden theater just did not want it there anymore."

For the record, The Golden Theatre didn't evict Avenue Q...The Shubert Organization did.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:42pm

Punc-tuation
Punc
Punc
Punc
Punc-tuation

[blaxx]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:44pm

Yes it was. Just not enough money to justify running any longer.

Lol, no kidding Sherlock - here's your redundancy award!

[B3TA07]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:47pm

But I already have five of those!

[TheatreDork2]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 5:49pm

Hold onto your hats kids. Beauty & the Beast was closed so The Little Mermaid could move in.

[TimesSquareRegular]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 6:16pm

I always come here for the LATEST updates and insider information.

Never knew that when ticket sales fall off after a healthy run, a show might close.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 9:27pm

"Lol, no kidding Sherlock - here's your redundancy award!"

I was correcting a false statement. Avenue Q IS making money. It's closing because they don't expect to make money in the fall. Just because a show is closing doesn't mean the show isn't making money. Tarzan closed because The Little Mermaid was over budget and bleeding money.

[winston89]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 9:51pm

"I was correcting a false statement. Avenue Q IS making money. It's closing because they don't expect to make money in the fall. Just because a show is closing doesn't mean the show isn't making money. Tarzan closed because The Little Mermaid was over budget and bleeding money"

How does that make sense? Tarzan and Mermaid weren't on the boards at the same time.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 9:59pm

winston-
It's called cutting your losses. They couldn't close Poppins because it was both doing well in New York, and they had just closed the London production. Beauty had already announced closing (probably so Mermaid could have a theatre). Tarzan was the only thing they could close. Mermaid (from several inside sources) was not doing well financially, so they cut their losses and closed Tarzan so that they could divert the money going to keep it running over to Mermaid.

[TheatreDork2]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 10:02pm

Bad choice...

Perhaps hiring a director with GOOD musical theatre experience.

[winston89]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 10:09pm

husk_charmer, I see where you're coming from. But, the reason why they closed Beauty was not because of finances. In fact Beauty would still easily be playing today if it wasn't closed to make room for Mermaid. Tarzan closed because it wasn't making a penny not because of Mermaid.

[TheatreDork2]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 10:14pm

Yes it did. They were planning on implementing changes from the successful foreign productions. Tarzan was making enough money to continue but they had more confidence with Mermaid.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 10:15pm

^Exactly. I never said Beauty closed for finances. I said it closed for Mermaid to have a home. Therefore, since you can't close a show twice, Tarzan was the one to get the chopping block.

[B3TA07]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 11:33pm

I have to disagree with the argument though; Disney chose to close B&tB, not the Lunt-Fontanne.

[Byron Abens]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 11:44pm

Disney didn't close Beauty and the Beast so The Little Mermaid could have a theatre. They closed it because it would have meant that they would have had two family oriented musicals both competing for the exact same audience base. That would not have been good for business for either show. Despite the quality of Mermaid it would have drained business from Beauty or been ignored because Beauty would have been seen as a superior production.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 7/22/09 at 11:48pm

"I was correcting a false statement. Avenue Q IS making money. It's closing because they don't expect to make money in the fall".

Just curious, Fosse76, and I'm pretty sure you have the answer for this - I thought that not making the nut was the only reason a show could be evicted. My understanding is that it only has to happen once, and then they can evoke the stop clause anytime that they want to after that. Did Ave Q ever fallen below its nut, or can they evict a show for whatever reason they want? Or none?

I remember Jackie, An American Life (great show, by the way) ran at the Belasco for ages, losing money every week, but the Shuberts let it run because there was no demand for the theater, and the deep-pocketed producers of the show kept ponying up the rent.

[TheatreDork2]

Posted: 7/23/09 at 12:08am

2 consecutive weeks below their nut is grounds to kick out the show.

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 7/23/09 at 12:12am

I heard it as three weeks. Maybe it depends on the theater.

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 7/23/09 at 12:19am

No, I don't think it would be a theater-by-theater basis as it's the organization that calls the shots, and it's their theaters. I think theaterdork is right (not your first tapdance despite your newjack status here, is it, theaterdork?)



Question still remains, though. Did Ave Q fall below its break-even two weeks in a row or are there other grounds under which they could be bounced?

[blaxx]

Posted: 7/23/09 at 12:27am

I'd say more than two weeks in a row.

[Byron Abens]

Posted: 7/23/09 at 12:28am

Maybe the producers decided it was time to pull the plug? It's better to be remembered closing while you are still drawing decent attention, rather than limping along to the finish line. And by posting a closing notice several months in advance it gives plenty of people time to catch it "just once more."

As the great Madame Rose said, "Make them beg for more, and then don't give it to them."