Broadway Grosses: Week Ending 3/9/25 — Page 4

gibsons2 said: "RippedMan said: "On one hand, I think it's kind of cool that the hottest ticket is a Shakespeare play in 2025. And on the other hand, I do think it's gross that tickets are as high as they are. Denzel could have easily told them to set aside a certain amount of fairly priced seats, etc. But then there's also the gross beast that is resale. Why aren't we mad at the idiots paying $500 to see it? Or should Denzel and team asked for some of the overages to be passed back to the actors/crew? I mean they do it on AEA tours, so why not on Broadway?"

Did Hugh Jackman passed anything to the actors/crew? Did Josh Groban? People paid very high prices to see them both, especially Jackman. The Music Man was making over 3 mil a week and people stayed outside in the frigid cold in winter for a chance to buy a rush ticket. Both men were celebrated for selling out shows.

If not, why Denzel should be doing that? Just curious about your train of thoughts."

A friend who worked as an usher at the Winter Garden theater told me ushers received a bonus on the last day of The Music Man. I forget the number but it was around $5k. I’m guessing the actors/crew all received bonus checks either from Hugh or the Music Man producers.

Hopefully Denzel and Jake or Othello producers will give something to the cast/crew/house folks at the Barrymore when the production ends in June.

Wick3 said: "Back in 2016, Hamilton could have easily charged Othello level prices and they all would have sold… but they didn’t sell them at astronomical prices. Who profited instead? Ticket resellers/scalpers.

The top ticket for Hamilton in 2016 was $998 which they sold for many, many months. So, that's false. 

 

Dang. I cannot afford a $2300 roundtrip ticket to Guam.

I do think that in 2025, with smartphones in everyone’s hands, producers could find a way to make it significantly more difficult for scalpers. Make it a non transferable digital ticket that only becomes scannable thirty minutes before curtain. I’m sure there are plenty of better ideas than that too.

In my opinion, it is great that Broadway is attracting such big names. It does require that they be well compensated for their efforts. It is great that producers who take incredible risks and lose money on three of four shows earn enough on projects like Othello to keep themselves in the game. It is great that we live in a country where people can spend their disposable income in a way that makes them happy.   For many years, artists allowed scalpers and resellers to make big money when there was a demand surge.  Thank goodness for dynamic pricing.  No one is being forced to shell out $915 for a ticket.   I won't pay it, but I am happy for those who can and enjoy it.  

IdinaBellFoster said: "Lot going on in here!

I’ll add to the chorus that thinks the OTHELLO gross is well, kind of gross. The major issue for me is not the price of the top or average tickets, is that even the lowest price was high. No one is saying the producers and creatives can’t make money, but especially when this is a public domain work, it feels gross to make it entirely cost prohibitive. If they record it when the run is closing, that would go a long way for accessibility."

Lol like it's not a business primarily. You have no clue about Broadway producing or investing, it's not a charity and producers owe you nothing regarding price accessibility.

TotallyEffed said: "I do think that in 2025, with smartphones in everyone’s hands, producers could find a way to make it significantly more difficult for scalpers. Make it a non transferable digital ticket that only becomes scannable thirty minutes before curtain. I’m sure there are plenty of better ideas than that too."

I do like this idea. The Public Theatre does it with their digital tickets. 

The problem with this though is that it will impede regular folks from moving tickets around. Example: Since I live in the area, if I have friends coming to NYC to see a show, they ask me to buy at the box office to save fees and then I transfer them when I get them. If I’m not able to be there when they go, they won’t get their tickets. 

blaxx said: "IdinaBellFoster said: "Lot going on in here!

I’ll add to the chorus that thinks the OTHELLO gross is well, kind of gross. The major issue for me is not the price of the top or average tickets, is that even the lowest price was high. No one is saying the producers and creatives can’t make money, but especially when this is a public domain work, it feels gross to make it entirely cost prohibitive. If they record it when the run is closing, that would go a long way for accessibility."

Lol like it's not a business primarily. You have no clue about Broadway producing or investing, it's not a charity and producers owe you nothing regarding price accessibility."

Never said they did. They are free to charge what they want and we are free to discuss our issues with it. Plenty of other star-driven pieces manage to be a bit more accessible while still turning major profits.

A question about Maybe Happy Ending Box Office. It's settled into the low $800K the last few weeks and I wondered if that was enough to meet their weekly nut or are they just keeping going  in an attempt to get to the Tonys despite being under what they need to be making?

Not sure why there is so much sympathy for the investors. A producer pitched to me an investment in a show. As a lawyer who prepares and negotiates similar documents for non-theater investments, I was incredulous reading the various legal documents. No one who hoped to make any money would invest based on those documents. The producer who pitched the investment to me says a lot of people make a $50k (or much bigger) investment do it for the loss to offset capital gains and for the opportunity to go to opening night and, if the show wins a Tony, the right to buy a Tony award. I am not a theater professional but I always understood that the producers who bring in investors get fees off the gross. 

dan94 said: "The goalposts do not move back."

I'm looking at this as a glass half empty/half full. Obviously theater is a business and in order for any show to stay open, it has to be profitable. And it has been proven repeatedly that a good production with some A-list film or tv talent will bring in big audiences (who by extension will pay top dollar for their tickets). We've seen this formula play out many times. Even a mediocre productions (*coughMusicMancough*) will be elevated with a big name film performer. 

And the reason that Othello is going to be able to command the kind of prices it has, at least in the short term, is because it's a limited opportunity for an audience to see two very fine, popular actors performing live. This isn't a show that's going to run for three years. And regardless of how talented a true Shakespearian performer might be, they don't have the name quality that Washington has. So the audience who really want to see him on stage will cough up a few hundred dollars per ticket and consider it a once in a lifetime kind of experience.

The question is whether or not this model is sustainable over the long term. It will work in a limited run show because a built in scarcity will control the equation. Even Broadway is under the control of supply and demand and when you have high demand for a show that is going to have a very limited supply (in regards to total tickets for the run), we get these astronomical prices. It will work for Othello, but it will not work for 99% of other productions that want to have extended runs and long-term viability. The big unknown factor is the audience limit on being willing to pay these kinds of prices. As I've said, for a once in a lifetime kind of opportunity to see a favorite actor live, people might be willing to pay prices that they never would otherwise. This isn't going to "lift all boats" (outside of the cast and crew for Othello getting to work for the entire run). I think that it's unfortunate that with only a 15 week run that there will be limited (if any) opportunity for a real fan of either the actors or the play who cannot afford these astronomical prices to have some opportunity to see the show and I think that there would be a lot less outrage over the prices if there was something like rush tickets or a lottery that would allow more access. Unfortunately dynamic pricing is here to stay, at least until the audience gets fed up and stops being willing to pay these kind of prices regardless of who might be on the stage.

TotallyEffed said: "I do think that in 2025, with smartphones in everyone’s hands, producers could find a way to make it significantly more difficult for scalpers. Make it a non transferable digital ticket that only becomes scannable thirty minutes before curtain. I’m sure there are plenty of better ideas than that too."

There are ticketing platforms that are doing things like this. The platform Dice, for instance, limits ticket transfers to people who have verified accounts, links tickets to phone numbers, limits the number of tickets in one's possession, tickets have unique QR codes generated on the day of the event, and tickets cannot be sold on third-party reseller platforms. It also does not have a reselling marketplace- if you want to get rid of your ticket, you get a refund and the ticket is returned to the stock to be sold again at the price you paid. It's not foolproof, of course- somebody can sell informally on social media or craigslist or whatever and demand whatever price- but it is much more limiting. It makes scalping harder. Larger ticketing platforms could be doing this- but they've decided to get in on the scalping and make it happen on their terms, not eliminate it. 

Updated On: 3/12/25 at 11:05 AM

To Dreamboy3/Lawyer--you obviously do not understand alot about this investing/business

"Not sure why there is so much sympathy for the investors."--nobody is asking for SYMPATHY,. But UNDERSTANDING (which you seem to lack in this instance)--but investors are PASSIVE in all this, and we make the production possible (since we are "paying" for it)

"No one who hoped to make any money would invest based on those documents." We HOPE we do make money--but realize it is not too likely (and maybe the show you worked on had REALLY BAD financials)

"The producer who pitched the investment to me says a lot of people make a $50k (or much bigger) investment do it for the loss to offset capital gains"--WRONG---show profits is PASSIVE INCOME and CANNOT offset capital gains 1:1

"and for the opportunity to go to opening night"--finally ,CORRECT!

"and, if the show wins a Tony, the right to buy a Tony award"--WRONG!  "investors" do NOT get the right to buy a Tony--one needs to be a Producer above title (of course, an investor of a large amount of $$, can "demand"/request a Producer credit)