Broadway Grosses: Week Ending 7/30/2006- Page 2

[ChanceWayne]

Posted: 7/31/06 at 6:38pm

http://www.livebroadway.com/bwygrosses.asp

This link won't tell you what the break even point is for a show but it does list its' potential which I find rather interesting.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/31/06 at 6:45pm

They'll be an announcement in the next couple of days.

[jdixon69]

Posted: 7/31/06 at 7:55pm

Don't mean to geek out on ya, but wouldn't a more accurate measure of a show's relative health be avg.ticket price multiplied by % attendance?

Actually, come to think of it, the most accurate measure would be weekly gross divided by weekly potential gross.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 7/31/06 at 8:15pm

Not really. The "health" of a show is determined by how much it costs to run versus how much it actually grosses. Attendance figures have a tenuous relationship to that, show to show because of differences in theatre size and average ticket price (among other things). For instance, Drowsy Chaperone's attendance numbers are generally only in the 70s, but it's grossing roughly $900K per week (with an average ticket price near $90)which translates into a weekly profit of around $300K -- obviously means it's doing very well financially. Wedding Singer on the other hand, while also in the 70s in attendance each week at a much smaller theatre than Drowsy is in (300+ fewer seats), is heavily discounting thus has a low average ticket price and is barely grossing enough to break even weekly even though it costs roughly the same as Drowsy to run each week.

Thus, even though the two shows have similar attendance figures and running costs, the disparity in pricing and theatre size means that one is a hit while the other is struggling.

Similarly, the reason Rent has been able to survive (and still run profitably) even when attendance has dipped into the 60s is that its weekly running costs are very low ($315K or so). Chicago can also credit its long run to a low weekly nut which makes it somewhat impervious to attendance flunctuations over the years.

That's why you more or less ignore the attendance figures and focus on the actual gross versus the weekly cost in determining how well a given show is doing at the box office.

Updated On: 8/1/06 at 08:15 PM

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/31/06 at 10:09pm

I know DISNEY famously does not let anyone know how much their shows cost to run, but do any other shows sell toys galore to the audience at an added gross?
Every kid comes out of THE LION KING, BEAUTY and I am sure, soon TARZAN with a stuffed toy or T shirt.
Pretty smart, huh?

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/31/06 at 11:43pm

I wonder if CHAPERONE still plans to try to move to a smaller theatre. Being perceived as a sell out show is actually a key to a show's survival on Broadway (read Goldman's THE SEASON for a great explanation why) and they might benefit "selling out" a slightly smaller house rather than stay in the 70s/80s in a large theatre, even though their gross is clearly healthy.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/31/06 at 11:48pm

Moving a show these days is Very expensive.
Not like when David Merrick had the tappers tap
"across the stret"
Only DISNEY can afford to do that.
CHAPERONE is doing great where they are
and should stay there
All The Hotel guests can roll out of Bed
and see this Wonderful Show!

Updated On: 8/1/06 at 11:48 PM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/31/06 at 11:54pm

It is expensive, but it does still happen. The reason I ask though, is because the producer specifically planned on moving CHAPERONE to a smaller house next season. CHAPERONE pretty much only opened at the Marquis because WIW was cleared specifically to allow the show to open before the Tony deadline.

The musical IS doing great; but hypothetically, the Marquis could be making more money if it had a tenant who actually sold out the theatre (not that there is such a sure bet show on the horizon) but CHAPERONE could benefit as well by actually being a sold out hit.

As we know from this thread, most people judge a show's success on the capacity filled of the auditorium...

[courtnyj]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 12:00am

I would love to see The Drowsy Chaperone in a smaller theatre! I agree that it would become more popular and sell even more tickets if it became a "sold out" show in a smaller theatre.

ETA: An awful lot of people judge a show based on it's popularity. "If it's selling out it's got to be good!" (Fortunately The Drowsy Chaperone is! ) Updated On: 8/1/06 at 12:00 AM

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 12:03am

I don't know what theater they would want to move it to? Maybe the Imperial, it's a pretty hot theater, if DRS doesn't do to well.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 12:07am

Way back when I first heard the CHAPERONE moving plans, I heard that PIRATE QUEEN was eyeing the Marquis and CHAPERONE was looking at the Barrymore. PIRATE QUEEN has of course taken the Hilton and COMPANY, the Barrymore. CHAPERONE may simply have to stay where it is for lack of any other available theatres.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 12:51am

Any truth to the rumour that that Marriot is an Investor
in DROWSEY?

[brad3]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 1:20am

I'm worried about The Wedding Singer

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 1:26am

I think Sweeney had a good run, no need to have another show running on Broadway for years and years. Same to Wedding Singer. It wasn't horribble, it wasn't great, let it close after the summer so some other shows can see the light of day.

[RYANWOODS]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 6:27am

I cant see Drowsy Chaperone moving and paying the expenses to do so when its surviving well at The Marquis.

The Wedding Singer keeps going lower - im questioning if it may not see out the end of the year? Possibly High Fidelity could go in here? I think the O'Neill will be too small for the show.

DRS i think is fine...i think itll pick up again, the show is reportedly planning a London production next year.

What does everyone think of The Producers? Will it last much longer? I read somewhere Evita was eyeing the theatre...

[Smaxie]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 8:18am

As per Michael Riedel in the NY Post, Evita was looking at the Neil Simon Theatre, where Hairspray is playing (but for the 2007-2008 season).

[Smaxie]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 8:27am

As for High Fidelity, it has a cast of 15, with no star names. Rather than a 1,400 seat theatre like the Hirschfeld or a 1,500 seat theatre like the Imperial, it would probably be better served in a 1,100 seat theatre like the O'Neill.

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 8:38am

Now that it's in the Marquis, I'm not sure if the Drowsy would be easily adjustable to a theatre with a stage that's significantly smaller. I'm not saying it couldn't, I really don't know, just that it might be a problem.

As for Sweeney, another reason why any sort of extension is very unlikely is because Gemignani and Dorothy Stanley are both leaving and not easily replaceable.

[mijofly19]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 8:54am

Why is Dorothy Stanley leaving? Is she doing another show?

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 8/1/06 at 9:06am

I haven't seen an official announcement, but on ATC someone wrote that she'll be Fr. Schneider in the Arena Stage Cabaret in D.C. coming up very soon.