Do ticket prices ruin the magic?

[emo_geek]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 1:05am

I was searching online just now for tickets to different shows I wanted to see, and like always I got mad at how much tickets were...and how hard they were to get. This got me thinking...Brodway shows are suppose to bring joy and magic to it audiences...do you not enjoy the shows as much becuase of what you paid for the ticket?

Posted: 9/15/06 at 1:18am

well, people certainly talk about shows with regard to being worth the ticket price, so I guess it can be annoying after a show ends to think you spent x amount of money to see that.

[emo_geek]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 1:24am

True...sometimes I feel antsy during a show because I know how much I spent and I then expect more and can't relax and enjoy whats there.

[muscle23ftl]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 1:58am

What shows are you talkin about?

[Tag]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 2:53am

Those prices make the magic

[lfae]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 3:21am

Personally, I buy tickets SO far in advance that by the time I see the show, the prices are entirely forgotten as the credit card is paid off and it's like the debt never existed. I just have tickets and am seeing a show. Some were $110, some were $25. I don't remember which.

[bwayondabrain]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 6:16am

ticket prices also make me kind of feel bad to see shows- im a minor, still, and so my parents are stuck paying for the tickets, and they insist on seeing as many shows as possible! i offer to pay for my tickets, but they dont let me for some reason, so i guess i shouldnt be sad
still...tickets are rather pricy

[adamgreer]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 6:48am

They certainly raise my expecations for what it is I am going to see...

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 6:56am

Personally, I buy tickets SO far in advance that by the time I see the show, the prices are entirely forgotten as the credit card is paid off and it's like the debt never existed. I just have tickets and am seeing a show. Some were $110, some were $25. I don't remember which.

Just a note for you (it may be a surprise):

The price that you paid is printed clearly on the ticket.

Also, if you're sitting in the balcony (think FAR AWAY and UP), you likely paid $25. If you're sitting in the orchestra (think CLOSE TO THE STAGE and ON THE FLOOR), chances are you paid $110.

Updated On: 9/15/06 at 06:56 AM

[once a month]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 7:18am

I hate to admit that personally, it does ruin the magic for me to a degree. Even with discounted tickets, and the 'haggling' for seat locations, I'm getting real weary real fast. I've been to a few hundred shows, from the original Chorus Line to now. My ticket for this revival (in the mezz no less) cost more than the previous five times I saw the orignal run. I try to see every musical...not any more. I'm seeing Company, Chorus Line, Grey Gardens and Curtains (if and when)...sorry to miss all the others, but the producers can kiss my rear end for with holdin the majority of orch for exhorbanant prices.

[madbrian]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 7:59am

Although the ticket prices prohibit me from seeing as many shows as I'd like, they don't ruin the experience of good theater. However, I think the prices do exacerbate the experience of bad theater. I can remember thinking "I can't believe I spent > $100 for that" or "Thank God we only paid half-price for that".

[lfae]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 8:05am

Wanna be a Foster, you took me FAR too literally! Theoretically I know how much my tickets cost, but I don't take that into account when I see the shows, is all I was saying. I don't think, oh THIS one cost $110 and THIS one cost only $25 - because truly, the credit card has been paid off. Those prices are only numbers, not truly dollar amounts any more. And I love my theatre (and only see shows I want to see!) so I don't hold higher hopes for a higher priced show or anything. They're all the same to me!

(Although I will admit, comps are best. Hehe)

[ashley0139]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 8:25am

im a minor, still, and so my parents are stuck paying for the tickets, and they insist on seeing as many shows as possible! i offer to pay for my tickets, but they dont let me for some reason, so i guess i shouldnt be sad

a) When I was a minor, I still paid for almost all of my tickets. I feel ripped. b) You should feel lucky that your parents want to see all those shows. That's amazing, and be grateful for it now before you actually do have to start paying for them and won't be seeing nearly as many.

I will say, though, that I almost never pay full price to the show. Unless it's something I know I want to see so badly so I buy tickets far in advance just to make sure I will see it. I haven't done that in a while, because I can usually figure out a way to get rush/lottery or theatermania or something.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 8:30am

I see far more regional and amateur theatre than Broadway fare these days, and frankly the stuff done outside New York looks far better. It's not as manufactured, and with a good production (of which there have been many), you get the sense that the people involved actually put their hearts into making it that way -- while in New York, the professional stuff is exactly that: a job. A job well done, to be sure, but with about as much heart as the proverbial leman wrapped around a gold brick. I go hoping I'll see something that will give me that same "Wow..." feeling I used to have with a Broadway show. But it just isnt there anymore. It's like taking a ride in an amusement park: when it's over, you think, "Okay, that was fun. Who's up for dinner?"

And certainly the ticket prices have influenced that. I dont blame the producers: the cost of theatre rentals and the ever-escalating unon demands have forced tickets to an almost unaceptable level. But as long as there are corporate expense accounts, we'll continue to see these overpriced orchestra seats for the AmEx crowd.

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 10:06am

Well if you consider "magic" a Day-Glo green seizure with an HR Puff-n-Stuff spider then maybe not.

The ticket prices have destroyed any attempts at legit art on Broadway. The old business model needs to go. Right now all we get are on-man-show concerts and theme park spectacles based on mediocre movies.

I am not sure what all the answers are, but I know things are not working now. Broadway has always been a make-or-break kind of place, but now it is fleecing the public. Even off-Broadway is a joke, and that used to be a place where the underdog flourished. Now it is a place where producers can pay people less, lower production values and rob audiences.

Are Lion King, Wicked and the Jersey Boys worth $120.00 per ticket? Um Disney World is cheaper than that and it lasts longer! When my friends come to the city, they ask about TKTS, which is one of the biggest scams. 50% off of $110.00 is not a bargain, especially considering most people in that line take whatever they can get. Something is obviously going wrong when 300 people show up daily for the Wicked lotto.

You will hear many people on this board go on and on about the “artists” involved. This is just the tail wagging the dog. The real problem is NOT the artists or unions, a handful of greedy producers are doing this.

Also where is Playbill.com and Broadwayworld.com in covering these issues?? They are very real.

[Anakela]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 10:22am

talk about your perfect timing- there's a story in this morning's Times about tickets and TKTS and lottos and everything that I am reading right now.
NY Times story

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 10:23am

>> The real problem is NOT the artists or unions, a handful of greedy producers are doing this.

When it comes to assigning blame, you can spread it pretty easily, I think. Look at that all time favourite, "stunt casting": some TV or movie star does a Broadway turn (and usually not very well). You think that's just because the producer is greedy? Think again -- that star's hit a dry spot, needs some ready money, and sees a cash cow sitting off 42nd Street. Anyone want to guess what Julia Roberts made for phoning in her performance?

The unions? Dont get me started there. I was a member of USA 839, and it was a waste of three thousand dollars in fees, "exams", and annual dues. The union was happy to be there when the money was coming in, but it knows jack sh*t about quality. Anyone with five grand can buy a membership into what used to be one of the most prestigious unions in theatre. Insofar as quality control, my "exam", such as it was, was with a committee of six people who had no clue what they were supposed to be looking for. Five minutes after it started, it was done, and I felt no more qualified to be a professional designer afterwards than I did going in.

I realize that a career in New York theatre is dicey and ephemeral at best, and as a result, everyone wants to make as much cash as possible in the shortest amount of time... because you never know when and/or if there's going to be another job down the road. But that doesnt excuse the rampant greed on all sides.

Sadly, nothing will change, not as long as mediocre but pretty shows like WICKED run for three years (and counting) at 80+ per cent capacity. There will always be folks willing to pay that kind of money (or have the company pay it for them) just so they can say they saw a "Broadway" show.

[avab802]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 10:32am

ashley, I do the same thing now. I only buy full-priced tickets far in advance if it's something I *really* want to see. So far this season I have tickets for ACL and Mary Poppins. That's it. For anything else I'll be trying for rush/lotto, TKTS, or waiting for discounts to come out. I would love to see every show that's opening (well, almost) but I know I'll end up missing a lot of them because I can't spend the money, don't have the time to rush, or just never win the lottery.

once a month, you hit the nail on the head: "sorry to miss all the others, but the producers can kiss my rear end for with holdin the majority of orch for exhorbanant prices."

Amen! I don't want to sit in the mezzanine, I want to sit in the orch, but I cannot and will never pay $300/seat for it! That's just ridiculous. I went to the box office to buy tickets for Mary Poppins on the morning they went on sale to Disney Visa card holders and the best I could get in center orch for $110 was row M. I didn't ask how far back the "premium" seats went, but I'd bet I got one of the first rows available at the $110 price. It's just ridiculous and it makes me not even want to see shows that have "premium" seating. It's making Broadway even more into something that is only for the rich.

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 10:43am

Honestly, I think if there's any people to blame, it's the people who pay that much money to see a show. If people are going to pay, why should producers make tickets cheaper? Even the premium seats I mean hey if you're one of those people who has all the money in the world, why not secure a good seat?

I think we're pretty fortunate the way Broadway is...the average ticket price is like $78 let's say? What if everyone paid that and that's how the average was made? I would never see as many shows as I do. I pay for rush seats while others pay full price, which is how the average gets at $78.

To answer the original question, partially because of what I'm used to paying, the *only* time I ever kept in mind how much I paid to see something was Rent 10-$500. The whole time during the show I kept thinking about it and referring to it. I kept saying "this was so worth $500"

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 11:09am

SeanMartin - You are missing the point. I did not mention many factors. Theatre rentals for instance are very expensive. You are right everyone wants money, but the distribution of wealth is ridiculous. As a producer, you juggle all of these things, but what is paramount is the bottom line. Most producers want to go the "safe" route, this could be Legally Blond or it could be The Wedding Singer. Brining in Usher to boost sales at Chicago is not costing ticket buyers anything extra, and he does not come cheap. If you ever get the opportunity, take a look at a theatre budget. I know everyone has to make money, but look at percentages. Producers get a lion’s share.

Theatre is such a dynamic place for many different artists. Unfortunately, the NYC theatre scene generally stymies most creative people. Look at these theatre festivals, they are sold out. Many of these productions will disappear forever.

It is always a little scary when I hear people bitch about Union dues. At least there is a union! I have seen first-hand how extremely difficult it is to bring in a union and how hard it is give workers real rights.

Unfortunately, most actors spend most of the time unemployed; it is the nature of the beast. At least you can get benefits. Most Wal-mart employees do not even get health insurance, and they work all week under terrible conditions. Please just remember you are doing a huge disservice when you openly criticize a union, it colors all unions badly. The union is not going to find you work; they are not your agent. When you find work, they will protect you. I know you cannot work outside of equity, but it is not the unions fault. Republicans tar and feather unions just as they do “liberals.” This is why we have such a wonderful president. Republicans are united we are not. United we stand, divided we fall.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 11:20am

>> Producers get a lion’s share

Unless you have numbers to back that up, I have to disagree. The *production company* seems to get more, but they have more overhead than just that one production. The producers themselves are also first responsible to the investors, and they're not going to p*ss off that bunch by taking more money than they should have by rights, certainly not in these economic times.

But as much as we want to laud the unions for making things so wonderful for the poor undertrod performer, let's remember the stranglehold they have on Broadway (and now off-Broadway as well). Mount a straight play in a small musical house? You *must* hire a minimum of eight musicians, even they do nothing but sit on their keesters all night -- union rules. Bring in a major performer like Jonathan Pryce for MISS SAIGON? The actors' union goes ballistic and threatens to boycott the show, even if it means killing the job of every other performer on that stage. Bring in a talented young designer to handle your show? Not unless s/he is *forced* to join 839 first.

Sorry, unions have become a waste of time, IMHO. They may have once served a great purpose, but now they're starting to believe a bit too much in their own mythos.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 11:56am

I don't really see the need in sitting in the orchestra. When I went to NYC I sat in the mezz for Wedding Singer and Sweeney and I thought both were great seats. The most I paid for a ticket was $50 for Wedding Singer. Although the balcony in DRS kind of sucked, but was still a lot of fun.

[tinadoll]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 1:12pm

It surprises me that more people don't know about the TKTS booth. You can get really good seats are really good prices. But yes ,if you are paying 120 bucks for a good ticket to see a show,that show better be worth it. Cuz it does suck if the show sucks or is short and you paid full price (think Lestat or Drowsy)

[Magdalene]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 1:29pm

SeanMartin, for every Julia Roberts, you have a David Hyde Pierce (who was outstanding in Spamalot!). I generally pay full price (but not premium price) for the shows I want to see---I live 300+ miles from NYC and want to make sure I have a ticket to the show when I get there! I was only disappointed once, and that was the 2nd Broadway show I ever saw---it was Sunset Boulevard, and I saw it the day after the OBC of Rent (which probably had a great deal to do with how I felt about Sunset---that and all the latecomers!) I don't regret anything I've paid for any show I've seen!!

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 9/15/06 at 5:15pm

Glad you have that kind of money to throw around. For myself, I tend to weigh out the ticket price against what I'm hoping to see. David Hyde Pierce at least has a history in the theatre; Roberts, if any, sure doesnt seem to, so I'd be more likely to see Pierce in Spamalot than Roberts in whatever forgetable play she was in.

But if you want more proof of the screwy power struggles that command Broadway, look no further than your local DVD store. Roundabout could have made a mint off PAJAMA GAME on just Connick's name alone, but it's not out there. It could made a pile of money for everyone from the producers tothe investors to the set designers to the actors to the musicians, but it wont. Nor will it be because too many people are fighting over control of money. We can have a Hollywood film that commands a running and working crew twenty times the size of your average Broadway play, and everyone gets something out of it through contracts that have been worked out by negotation. But think youll ever see a DVD of WICKED?

Not legally.

What's that tell you?