Broadway Grosses: Week Ending 7/2/17 — Page 3

Anyone have a clue what TGC's nut is? I figure it has to be insanely high, and not to mention the fact that they had to put so much money into it.

I would die to know the nut for TGC (without Josh) and Bandstand.

Also, is Ben's salary something like LuPone's (40k) or more Ripley's NTN (8k)? Just wondering, course.

Also, War Paint is already dead, sad. I think it will be the first, out of the four more likely, to get a closing notice.

RaisedOnMusicals said: "HogansHero said:No one cares about the percentage of capacity.

HH, I know you know what you're talking about, but that confuses me. Isn't the percentage of gross potential (not percentage of capacity) very relevant? Aren't projected recoupment schedules based on precisely that number? I always thought that the higher the percentage of capacity a show show does, the faster it will recoup. Am I wrong about that?



"





"

Recouoement schedules - ultimately - are based on dollars coming in versus dollars going out. Seats sold at full - or premium - prices versus the same seat sold with discount on line or TKTS - can effect the gross $$ - while counting equally in percentage of seats filled.

Factoribg in advance - producers and management will generally do all they can to nurse a show to profitable stretches. A smaller producer is more likely to have the passion to nurse a show - while a larger one (say Rudin or Disney) may be quicker to pull the plug if they believe they have more profitable projects in queue.

Same logic applies to theater owners.

Didn't GROUNDHOG have like a very very small advance tho??

@GhostXmas, a few comments

1. Not very many hover-ers that trudge succeed. Make a list. say, of 21st Century shows that trudge and I think you'll agree.

2. GHD is not, in fact, contributing anything toward recoupment if the "just south of" statement is true. Aggregate nut is just about equal to aggregate net gross.

3. The advance can/may carry them to new years. (I think it will.) I don't see the scenario beyond that.

4. Royalties are generally deferred, not waived, so they get you over the putative rough spot cashflow-wise, but they don't affect recoupment.

5. I don't think your small vs large producers comment is supportable. But in any case GHD is not a small producer show.

One additional point about a show's nut: generally when we see this info it comes from the offering papers. A good producer never takes his or her eyes off the expenses and works to bring them down, especially where a show is "trudging." We act like they are a fixed number but they aren't, and can vary significantly from week to week. (For example, one major place where expenses shift wildly is advertising and marketing. A new show may use the most expensive vehicles to establish itself, but then settle into much cheaper, and more targeted, means. But we sometimes see the opposite happening.)

Tim Minchin is moving back to Australia at the end of the year. I suspect GHD will close around then. He says he regrets not being at Matilda's closing.

neonlightsxo said: ""1. Not very many hover-ers that trudge succeed. Make a list. say, of 21st Century shows that trudge and I think you'll agree. "

This times a million. The only one I can think of is Gentleman's Guide?"

Only one I can think of in addition is Next to Normal, but honestly, it wasn't like it was a big budget show to begin with.

jbird5 said: "

Tim Minchin is moving back to Australia at the end of the year. I suspect GHD will close around then. He says he regrets not being at Matilda's closing."

If it comes down to that. Tim can always fly back for the closing. They do have flights from Australia

Funny, we were sitting behind an Australian family on the first day of their vacation in New York for the Closing of Matilda.

markypoo said: "To someone like myself - strictly a novice in these matters - can you inform as to just how much trouble War Paint is in?



"

War Paint's advance is very thin right now. I don't know how expensive the show is to run but given all shows seem to be expensive to run these days, it's hard to imagine it will last to the end of the year.

I brought up Matilda because it took an unusually long 19 months to recoup. So while it had good grosses, it must have had a very high weekly operational cost for it to have taken that long to just break even.

Call_me_jorge said: "i would love to know TGC's nut as well. People say it's high, but I don't believe that. I know they spent a lot of money for the set and getting the show to Broadway, but the weekly expenses can't be that high. It's not like there a ton of special effects being used. "

I feel like it has to be pretty high though. I mean: giant cast (counting swings it's somewhere around forty), a bunch of lead/supporting roles w/featured parts, a huge crew, hundreds of custom made egg shakers given out for free each performance, all the pierogis (also with custom boxes), huge hair/make-up crews (almost everyone in the ensemble regularly dyes their hair/gets temporary tattoos)...it's gotta add up. Plus I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that it had upwards of 20 million invested into it.

neonlightsxo said: "Jorge...why are you under the impression that "special effects" would cost more than paying a massive ensemble? Never mind. Why do I bother. You never learn.



"



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I think Groundhog Day is a great show, but it will always been a tough sell due to its name. I just think most audiences are turned off by it. I think they should have pimped it out in the West End first, since that's where all the hype was - Karl winning an Oliver award - and let it get some momentum. It's just a very British show of an American movie. The movie is beloved, sure, but I'm not sure anyone was wanting it to be a musical.