How BAD is Young Frankenstein realy doing?- Page 2

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 3/16/08 at 11:40pm

Usually the contracts are a year from opening night on Broadway.

False.

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 3/16/08 at 11:47pm

While there is no hard and fast rule, I would say it is more likely that contracts for this show might be from the beginning of the out of town tryout.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 12:19am

I thought contracts can last usually about 6 months to 1 year after opening.

[Tkt2Ride]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 12:23am

I always thought the high ticket price was an attempt to recover their initial investment faster and to take advantage of the stagehands strike at opening? They just wanted to cut into the scalpers income and they probably did. I would say it wasn't such a big cut though. It may have also discouraged some critics from an otherwise soft review verses a harsher one? The more you charge, the more that is expected of your show.

If the show really did offer an abundance of great showtunes or some really innovative improvements, it might have paid off? Though agreed, knowing they were facing an economic down turn, bad initial publicity of price gouging, doesn't impress the little people nor the income savvy. Sure, some people will pay out the nose for a ticket to see a certain show. Most though like to think part of that price includes the extra work and money scalpers have to invest in the first place. Did they buy Mel and Co. as legitimate scalpers or did they just see them as greedy businessmen? I'd say it was a little mixed.

It will be interesting to see how long they will run the show at a minimal or loss of profit before closing it? It may pick up during the Summer? Definately will in the Fall if it last that long. What many will be watching is how long will it take to pay off their first investment? If they do, how much influence will that have on future ticket prices? Well, it won't bring them down for shows investors feel are money in the bank. Shows like Disney's tried and true will just follow along. Others, who feel their products reputation is bankable, like Shrek, also may follow this route.

Of course, our economy and the de-valuation of the dollar will eventually force even Broadway to make adjustments. If they want to stay viable that is. Though watch. We will see an even greater influx of Foreigners who are coming to America, (how embarrassing), to save a buck! That's a tight gamble.

In the meantime though, from sales already generated by YF, even if they don't make an over all profit, they probably will turn out better than some of the other productions did during this time period. Even with a mediocre show.

I think they should be thinking about touring pretty soon. Not too much out there right now. I don't think it has the over all appeal that The Producers really had. They didn't put enough effort into making it more unique. Good for a laugh but it doesn't seem too many are paying to go back and see it, again and again? Not at $450 a pop, they aren't.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 12:29am

Can I have the English translation of that post please, Tkt2Ride?

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 12:41am

This is going to be my attempt at math that's going to include a lot of assuming, so bear with me.

Variety was reporting for a while grosses around 1.3-1.5 million a week, which would be a profit of six to eight hundred thousand dollars. Let's guess an initial investment of 20 million. At that rate (1.3 million a week at the least)from the beginning of previews through the first week of the New Year (weeks that were undoubtedly stronger than 1.3 mil due to curiosity from opening, the stagehands strike and the general rule that shows do well during the holiday weeks), that's 12 weeks, giving the show a profit of 7.2 million dollars (15.6 gross 8.4 in running costs) in the calendar year of 2007. Recent estimates from Variety (there was an article in the NYT Metro section on Saturday about this) that suggest that the show has just now dipped below 1 million to about 971,000 in the past two weeks. Meaning the show has grossed over a million each week during calendar 2008. This Sunday marks the end of the 11th week of the year, so at minimum we're talking 11 million, which would be a profit of at least 300,000 a week during what are some of the leanest months of the year. So that is an additional 3.3 million, bringing our total to 10.5 million, more than half way to return their investment.

Yes I know that this does not take into account the recent advertising blitz of commercials that make light of the fact that there is no more premium seating.

If the show dips to the point where it is only making 900k a week on a consistent basis (and this is bound to go up during the spring break weeks and again for a period once summer returns), the show is still making 200k in profits per week. The remaining 9.5 million left to recoup would take a little under 11 months aka February 2009.

Again I do understand that sustainability is part of the concern, but I'm sure that the show can maintain grosses at or near 900k a week, especially if you average in the weeks of the summer and next November/December that are bound to be stronger.

[scaryclowns223]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 12:48am

Thank you, frogs_fan, for your mathematical prowess.

Wow, February 2009, that's a long time for this musical to hold on... especially with Sutton leaving and Megan and Roger probably not far behind. Let's see if Sillerman and Brooks maintain confidence in the show, because the Times says others are trying to get in to the Hilton. (Though I can't imagine why.)

And this is kind of off-topic, but does Robert FX Sillerman come off as a Grade-A douche to anyone else?

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 12:53am

The only cast departure that I can see affecting attendance would be Megan's. The name Young Frankenstein is much bigger than Roger Bart or Sutton Foster (who is not leaving for another four months). Quality replacement casting will be important though.

[bk]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 1:47am

An assumption, and a rather large one, is being made that Variety was getting accurate reports. Just who do you think was doing the leaking to them? It's not brain surgery.

[IAMmyownMUSICAL]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 6:20am

One of my good friend who is a VERY VERY VERY reliable source, was talking to me about this yeserday.

I was over at his house while he was editing one of his films.

He said YF was playing to around 50-60 percent, and that it will be closing shortly after Sutton leaves, and the Tonys air.

PLUS...he added Chicago is going to be closing come summer/fall time as well.

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 9:41am

And this is kind of off-topic, but does Robert FX Sillerman come off as a Grade-A douche to anyone else?

The man's middle name is FX. Does it get anymore pretentious than that?

[BroadwayBound062]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 12:14pm

I didn't hate the show but it wasn't my favorite show!

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 12:30pm

"I always thought the high ticket price was an attempt to recover their initial investment faster and to take advantage of the stagehands strike at opening?"

The high ticket prices were set long before the strike happened.

"One of my good friend who is a VERY VERY VERY reliable source..."

"He said YF was playing to around 50-60 percent, and that it will be closing shortly after Sutton leaves..."

Sutton isn't even what is selling the tickets...I can't trust "VERY VERY VERY reliable" sources...wait for an official announcement.

[legally_brunette]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 5:34pm

i'm beginning to get a little worried. i'm seeing this in a couple weeks. while i knew the show wasn't "the most amazing thing i'll ever see in my entire life," i didn't think it would be as bad as people are letting on? IS IT? is it just a badly put-togerther show? material problems? (and i have not seen the movie yet, because i don't want to end up comparing performances) i'm nervous...

[frogs_fan85]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 7:00pm

I enjoyed the show. The sets and lighting are very well done. The Puttin' On The Ritz number is great. Excellent supporting performances from Andrea Martin and Chris Fitzgerald. The music while somewhat repetitive or simple does feature some witty lyrics like in "The Brain" and "Join the Family Business". My only quibble with the show was Roger Bart's hamminess. I saw the show in early previews with an understudy, Matthew LaBanca, playing Frederick and much preferred him to Bart.

[MiracleElixir]

Posted: 3/17/08 at 7:08pm

If you've never seen the movie and it doesn't take much to entertain you ("Oooh! Big, shiny sets and loud noises!"), you might enjoy it.

Personally, I found it a soulless, lifeless regurgitation of the movie's material with lots and lots of padding. But that's just me.

The cast really tries though, to their credit. Megan and Roger do what they can, and Shuler Hensley and Andrea Martin are fun to watch, but the only one who really made a strong impression (at least on me) was Christopher Fitzgerald. I was, frankly, amazed that after five months of acting in a poor-to-mediocre slog of a show, he still has so much boundless energy and enthusiasm.

Updated On: 3/17/08 at 07:08 PM

[IAMmyownMUSICAL]

Posted: 3/18/08 at 6:52pm

Millie, he didn't mean Sutton was the big draw. But she will be one of the last of the more known names the show has to leave, and after that, they'll have no one as a draw anymore. He just meant that the closing was gonna tied in around the same time as Sutton leaves the show.

[hotjohn]

Posted: 3/18/08 at 7:51pm

I saw YF two weeks ago on Friday and the theatre seemed almost if not quite full. I enjoyed it very much - OK it was never going to be as great as The Producers (which I have seen seven times to date) but contains some wonderful songs ( I can't get "Together Again For The First Time" out of my head) and some hilarious performances.

Sutton Foster was off so Inga was played by Renee Feder, who was so good I can't actually imagine Sutton playing the part (and I'm a big Sutton fan).

When I'm back in NY for an extended stay in the summer I hope to see YF again as I'm sure there's so much going on that it's hard to take it all in in just one viewing.

[mikem]

Posted: 3/18/08 at 7:59pm

If Sutton is leaving in July, isn't she going to be one of the first people to leave rather than one of the last? Except for Megan Mullaly, I wouldn't think the other cast members would have had enough pull last year to negotiate an exit prior to the Tonys (which are June 15).

[Theatrical Landladies]

Posted: 3/21/08 at 7:36am

"The cast really tries though, to their credit. Megan and Roger do what they can, and Shuler Hensley and Andrea Martin are fun to watch, but the only one who really made a strong impression (at least on me) was Christopher Fitzgerald. I was, frankly, amazed that after five months of acting in a poor-to-mediocre slog of a show, he still has so much boundless energy and enthusiasm".

Totally agree. Have to say we had a really enjoyable night at YF but it is not a great show and the jokes don't land right however it is definitely worth a visit. ROBIN WAGNER'S sets are worth seeing on their own!

The $450 tickets were SUCH a scam and so we were very pleased to get row B CENTRE for "regular" prices.

[justafan2]

Posted: 3/21/08 at 9:10am

I've seen this show twice (have tix for a third time in May) and (obviously) really enjoy it. I think the cast is wonderful and so are the sets. Some of the music is also very good. I don't really know why it's not doing well, except, maybe the fact that the initial ticket prices were so high that many people are scared off--thinking it was out of their price limit so they don't even consider it. That's too bad----

[uncageg]

Posted: 4/15/08 at 10:01pm

Thought I would post this here.....did anyone watch Sillerman on Theater Talk? They just put his interview up on their website and I am watching it now. It was taped on 4/12/08.

http://www.cuny.tv/series/theatertalk/listen.lasso?-database=CUNYPROG&-response=detail2.lasso&-table=webprogdetail2&-sortField=TapeDate&-sortOrder=descending&-op=eq&SeriesTitle=Theater%20Talk&-op=neq&Real_av=%3d%3d&-op=lte&TapeDate=12%2f31%2f2008&-op=gte&TapeDate=1%2f1%2f2008&-maxRecords=1&-search

Updated On: 4/15/08 at 10:01 PM

[thatgirl712]

Posted: 4/16/08 at 3:55pm

I like Megan Mullaly

[Josh Freilich]

Posted: 4/16/08 at 6:03pm

I liked it, but I found it stupid that they were aiming for spectacle over comedy, not like "THE PRODUCERS" which didn't rely mainly on spectacle. And the music was a little on the simple and repetitive side, which I hate to say about Mel Brooks, but I really think it needs to be said.

[TheActr97J]

Posted: 4/17/08 at 12:41pm

The cast is fantastic and were the lone reason that "Young Frankenstein" was an enjoyable evening at the theater.

the only one who really made a strong impression (at least on me) was Christopher Fitzgerald. I was, frankly, amazed that after five months of acting in a poor-to-mediocre slog of a show, he still has so much boundless energy and enthusiasm.

I completely agree! He is the best part of the show. I could easily see him winning the Tony, although Boyd Gaines may have more support. Still, I'd rather see the award go to a young actor pulling an explosive, breakout performance out of a souless, vaccuum of a show.