How much longer can "Chicago" last?

[BETTY22]

Posted: 8/14/22 at 5:06pm

Chicago's weekly break-even is very low, but the theatre owner can earn a lot more money each week with a new tenant. 

It's not as if Fan and Barry Weissler are going to produce many more shows and have to be kept happy. 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 8/14/22 at 6:40pm

BETTY22 said: "the theatre owner can earn a lot more money each week with a new tenant."

Hope springs eternal but the track record doesn't really support that optimism. 

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 8/14/22 at 6:44pm

Wish they’d renovate the theater but it’s def a mainstay at this point. 

[Rakesh Natarajan]

Posted: 8/14/22 at 7:21pm

Any new show is a financial risk, especially when compared to an old show that recouped ages ago. Plus, the Ambassador Theatre's layout is awful; the wings are tiny and can't really be used as storage space. Very few shows would want to be in that theatre because of the space constraints. It is arguably the least desirable Broadway theatre. If the Shuberts kicked out Chicago, then the Ambassador would likely be vacant for a while. Even if they find another show to fill the theatre immediately after Chicago, the theatre would likely have an extended vacancy after that show closes. I don't see Chicago lasting forever, but I definitely don't see it closing any time soon.

Updated On: 8/14/22 at 07:21 PM

[Patti LuPone FANatic]

Posted: 8/14/22 at 7:42pm

 

[blaxx]

Posted: 8/14/22 at 11:25pm

BETTY22 said: "Chicago's weekly break-even is very low, but the theatre owner can earn a lot more money each week with a new tenant.

It's not as if Fan and Barry Weissler are going to produce many more shows and have to be kept happy."

People on this board have been trying to predict a supposed imminent Chicago demise for who knows how long.

Can the theater make more? It's a show that has been running for decades, it's a guarantee that costs practically nothing to run. Any new show has extremely slim chances to match that, you wouldn't gamble something that works.

My prediction is that it will go when the Weisslers are no longer around.

 

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 8/14/22 at 11:36pm

The show is cheap to run and any new show would be a risk. The word that comes to mind as to why this show is still running with no signs of stopping is Tourists. Now, of course all of Broadway relies on toursism for ticket sales. But, for Chicago it’s a little different. Tourists, both international and domestic, tend to equate longevity with quality. In other words, it must be a good show if it has been running for as long as it has.

Look, at this point, the show has become a tourist trap show. A show those visiting NYC must experience, the same way they must take in the view of the city from atop the Empire State Building. 

I think that this production is rather long in the tooth with zero thought of upkeep being given. Fran and Barry are, I’m sure, happy to collect the money that this show brings them and leave it at that. Do keep in mind that this  production is not one that aged well. The Weissler’s don’t seem to care because people can and will keep coming, thereby allowing them to collect money. Between working there and seeing actors phoning it in or ensemble members who are a tad long in the tooth it shows. 

[Wick3]

Posted: 8/14/22 at 11:38pm

More than half of the Shubert org Broadway theaters are empty right now. If and only if all of their 17 Broadway theaters are fully booked and there's another production trying to get in, then I can see the Shuberts try to kick Chicago out of the Ambassador and perhaps have them move to off-Bway.

 

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 8/14/22 at 11:48pm

They’ll close it when it runs one performance longer than “Phantom”.

[Mr. Wormwood]

Posted: 8/14/22 at 11:49pm

I don't think the weekly gross matters much at this point. I think it runs until one or both of the Weisslers pass away but then all bets are off.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 12:05am

I don't know why people have such a hard time processing information that's right before them. As someone wrote above, it's a very undesirable theatre for many reasons. As I said, look at the track record. When the show leaves (and no one is going to kick it out), it is going to take a LOT to bring it into rentable condition. It needs a major renovation and that is not going to cure the unfixable structural defects. Some of you may not recall that this is the 4th stop for this show (including Encores). Most shows at the Ambassador flop. It's not a viable musical house. Even at the paltry grosses it is doing better than what would likely follow. Give it a rest.

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 12:13am

What makes it so undesirable? It’s the only Broadway theater I’ve never been in. 
 

it’s a good location though. 
 

I saw the all female version at LCT and was reminded how great the show is. 

[chewy5000]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 12:36am

Every time someone asks this question it gains an extra hundred performances.

[blaxx]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 12:43am

chewy5000 said: "Every time someone asks this question it gains an extra hundred performances."

The day it does close, everyone will claim they saw it coming. For the past 20 years.

[Nolan LuPone]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 11:07am

SouthernCakes said: "What makes it so undesirable? It’s the only Broadway theater I’ve never been in."

It’s not about the auditorium of the theater, but the backstage space. There just isn’t enough room for a big musical. Although, the auditorium itself isn’t great either. It’s a weird shape and the side sight-lines are horrible.

[darquegk]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 11:26am

Forever and for always. When Christ returns, he’ll promote the second coming with a limited run as Amos.

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 11:31am

I wouldn’t say the theatre’s desirability has much to do with the show closing or not (I believe it does not have a stop clause?) — it’s more a matter of Barry & Fran and Alecia Parker (the person who truly keeps this thing running) feeling this show still has juice and is worthwhile to keep it going.

They’ve just passed two milestones: 25 years and 10K perfs. I expect it has lost money since Anderson left (there’s no way this costs under $550K p/w to run, maybe closer to 6 by now), but as we know it has enough in the till to sustain a certain amount of losing weeks and they evidently don’t mind bleeding money here and there.

AND ALSO REMEMBER: if and when it closes at the Ambassador, it can always return. Be it on Broadway of Off (perhaps a little too big for NWS or Stage 42).

Updated On: 8/15/22 at 11:31 AM

[GiantsInTheSky2]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 11:42am

I imagine if/when Chicago closes, it would become a more play-focused venue as opposed to musicals. The plot itself is so small which explains the layout/shape and small wing space, so I doubt it would ever be realistic to do construction and fix those issues. 

[JSquared2]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 11:45am

Wick3 said: "More than half of the Shubert org Broadway theaters are empty right now. If and only if all of their 17 Broadway theaters are fully booked and there's another production trying to get in, then I can see the Shuberts try to kick Chicago out of the Ambassador and perhaps have them move to off-Bway.

Every single Shubert building has a show booked for the fall, along with at least one back-up in case anything falls thru. Many of these shows have not been announced.

 

 

 

 

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 11:51am

I hope Chicago never closes. I have seen it dozens of times at the Ambassador although I did take a two and a half year pause and now I've seen it twice post pandemic. I was reminded of just how special the show is. I am happy it found a home in a theater that is so unwanted. It is part of Chicago's mystique to have this periodic "why is Chicago still open" conversation. 

[pethian]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 12:14pm

JSquared2 said: "Wick3 said: "More than half of the Shubert org Broadway theaters are empty right now. If and only if all of their 17 Broadway theaters are fully booked and there's another production trying to get in, then I can see the Shuberts try to kick Chicago out of the Ambassador and perhaps have them move to off-Bway.

Every single Shubert building has a show booked for the fall, along with at least one back-up in case anything falls thru. Many of these shows have not been announced.



Precisely. If the Ambassador became available I bet it would be booked in a heartbeat despite its shortcomings. In my opinion, those three east-of-Broadway triple decker Shubert houses are a tougher sell.



"

 

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 1:48pm

More importantly Betty, why do you possibly care? 

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 2:37pm

Is the backstage area actually that bad at the ambassador? Have never been back there but there’s many a theatre with poor backstage space and they “make it work.”

[BETTY22]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 3:18pm

I look at the grosses each week and shows earning more are closing.

I don't understand how Chicago survives. 

Most people think it's about weekly overhead but that is only half of the story - it's also about how much money the theatre owner makes. If a house can gross $1 million a week, why be happy with making half on rent, bar, etc. 

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 8/15/22 at 5:03pm

This thread seems to be going around in circles. 

Why is Chicago still open? 

Because it has low costs and is still relatively popular and the theater is undesirable. 

The theater owners would make so much more money with a new super popular show. 

That might not necessarily happen. 

So why is Chicago still open?  

Because it has low costs..........and on and on and on.