For 300 bucks Val should be giving personal lap dances and reach arounds. Haha. Sad thing is, you don't even have to exaggerate with that one.
No, it's smart business Then so was the Stamp Act. I understand that theatre producers make the magic and they often lose money on it, but that doesn't mean charging $300+ (especially for a show like ACL, where you don't exactly see the money onstage) is smart business or that we should be grateful they're doing what they can to keep their shows open for us. Like Namo said, they need to start thinking creatively because this is outrageous.
I grew up in the NY area loving theatre (duh). I would consider my family fairly well-off, but not rich, and there was never a time in my childhood when Broadway ticket prices were reasonable enough to be able to see Broadway shows more than maybe once or twice a year, maybe less. Luckily it's a great area for the arts, so we've seen plenty of other productions...but Broadway is Broadway. Broadway is exciting. Broadway is where the experience feels most complete. And it's frustrating knowing that now, more than it even was for me, kids like myself are growing up thinking of theatre as this once-a-year thing that you have to fork over your wallet and a kidney to see. That creative, spontaneous spark that makes seeing a show so exciting has lost a lot in the past few years thanks to insane ticket prices like these premium seats.
Even more frustrating is seeing a lot of my friends from filthy rich families sitting in those premium seats once a month, some of them not even appreciating the things they're being dragged to see, while I scrounge for student prices when I'm able to make the train ride into the city. Just because those discount options exist, though, doesn't make the shocking cost of full price tickets right or fair. It doesn't even make it "smart business". Discounts are an exception to the trend, and that trend has been turning Broadway into a playground for the rich for a decade or two. This argument isn't new, but I'm bringing it up again because it surprises me that on a board full of such artistically-minded people, some still consider the "needs" of the producers before the art itself. I understand that sometimes business is business, and the bleeding-heart artsy types just don't think realistically. But it's impossible for me to look at a price like $301.25 (with that awful facilities fee adding insult to injury) and not think that something is seriously wrong and in need of change. I know no one is forcing me to buy that ticket, but if that's where Broadway is headed, I feel sick.
Seeing theatre is not a right. Sorry. If you can't afford to see A CHORUS LINE then you cant afford to. That's that. You're correct, seeing theatre is not a right. Our only true rights are our rights to things that are necessary--food, shelter, etc. But then why care about art? I understand that artists need to make money--I'm not saying theatre should be free. But I think we all believe that art should be accessible, and I just don't want people to get deluded into thinking that Broadway is still greatly accessible simply because things like rush and lotto are offered for $20-something. They probably won't be for much longer. It's a fact that Broadway ticket prices have gone up far faster than the actual rate of inflation, and at this rate there really will be no option in a decade or so for theatregoers on a budget. That shouldn't happen is all I'm saying. Think bigger than what's going on today--producers might be satisfied with selling a few premium-price seats for now, but if no one calls them on it, prices like that might be the norm throughout the theatre in the future. Who would have believed $300+ tickets just fifteen years ago?
"If there is going to be a restoration fee, there should also be a Renaissance fee, a Middle Ages fee and a Dark Ages fee. Someone must have men in the back room making up names, euphemisms for profit."
(Emanuel Azenberg)
Updated On: 10/7/06 at 08:56 PM
