IF YOU THINK PRICES ARE TOO HIGH DON"T BUY TICKETS — Page 3

"It's just as crazy as seats on an airplane. I've paid as low as $125 round trip on a flight with the person next to me paying $900 for the same flight."

Yes, but 2 completely different things IMO. In theater, you're paying for entertainment where the view can be very important to your enjoyment. The last row in the theater should not be priced the same as prime seats....and 2 seats in that last row with the exact same view shouldn't be priced with an $85 dollar difference.

"It's just as crazy as seats on an airplane. I've paid as low as $125 round trip on a flight with the person next to me paying $900 for the same flight."

"Yes, but 2 completely different things IMO."

You've missed my point entirely which was the incongruity of sitting right next to a person who paid a drastically different price than you did.

---

I agree with what has been said that if you want to see theatre, there IS a way to do it even with the way ticket prices are going. Im a student at the moment and am cutting down on alot of things which lets me use my money for the theatre.

Eat Cheap
Don't buy that beer
Don't buy that new t-shirt etc

If it is so important to you that you need it, you would find a way, trust me.

BroadwayGirl,

A few questions/observations:

1) OK, how would you do that and still have Broadway be a viable commercial enterprise? That is, if you still deem the $50 seats that can usually be found somewhere in the theatre for most shows too expensive to encourage new people to come to theatre, how exactly would you make that financially feasible? In sentiment, I'm all for what you suggest -- bringing new people to theatre -- but financially speaking, it's a pipe dream.

2) There is PLENTY of theatre to see in New York that is much more affordable. You are suggesting that in order to get people interested in theatre, we should be giving them the opportunity to see what is perceived to be the highest level of theatre (I don't go so far as to say the "best") at a significant discount. I say, why? Sure, it would be a nice thing to do. But beyond that, why? Are you suggesting that there is no other theatre in New York besides Broadway that might turn the "general" public into avid theatregoers? I don't think that's true.

3) You write that "The problem with ticket prices is getting the GENERAL public interested in theatre." Is that true? Is everyone that sees a show on Broadway these days a die-hard fan? Broadway is a major tourist destination and I believe that recent stats indicate that at least 50% of the ticketbuying public is from out-of-town. So plenty of people are getting interested in theatre notwithstanding ticket prices. Would lower prices increase that figure? Perhaps. But if it did so at the expense of the viability of the shows themselves, what good would that do?

4) You write that "...to me, there's a whole world of people out there who I think could enjoy and love theatre and make it a part of THEIR lives as well, if only the medium was affordable for them to take a risk on." OK. But what luxury item is that NOT true of? I too would love for more people in the world to experience fine food, or tropical vacations, or any number of enriching experiences but do we yell and scream that it's unfair for those things to be as expensive as they are? Perhaps not because those things aren't as important to us as theatre, which we see as a necessity for ourselves rather than a luxury. But it doesn't change the fact that when it comes to Broadway theatre specifically -- not all theatre in general -- we ARE dealing in a luxury item. Having it be cheaper would be nice but it's nothing we have the right to demand or expect.

---

Theatre has always been expensive. It is all relative. When I started attending shows in the early 70's Orchestra Seats were on the $20-$35 dollar range... pretty cheap right? Well consider how cheap when the average persons take home pay was $140 - $180 a week. Is the ration to average salary and theatre ticket prices really changed?
I was a student at the time and saw JCS standing room only and paid the whopping price of $6, I had to skip lunch for a couple days.

---

"Do you REALLY not see the problem with higher ticket prices? "

EVERYTHING has gone up in price. It always does, but since the recession, it seems more drastic. The price of theater has ALWAYS been very high in comparison to the prices of other forms of cultural experiences.

So, with that in mind, think of the rise in price of things that you like and want to keep in your life. Take smokers, for example. No matter how high the price of cigarettes goes, they will pay it. (now don't go saying I'm comparing cigarettes to theater.) Please understand my point that "where there's a will, there's a way."

For those of you who must have theater or die - how about attending less expensive theater? How about going to off broadway, regional, and local theater?

How about continuing doing the lotto, rush, and student discounts? How about saving up some money?

---

Mark_E...Wow, I guess I haven't been very clear. I'm very well aware of the government subsidized theatres in England, and I compared the Young Vic etc directly to New York's major not-for-profit off-Broadway theatres. What I am saying is our lack of federal funding for the theatre is PART of the ticket price PROBLEM. As I said in the other thread, the National Theatre receives almost twenty million pounds a year in gvoernment funding, the Royal Shakespeare company in the vicinity of 15 million and our Public Theatre (for example)...receives $40,000. Yes, I know this argument started out in regards to purely commercial theatre on Broadway, but I'm also saying the problem exists (if less severely) in our not-for-profit theatres as well...which are now acting like commercial theatres because they're just trying to balance their budgets.

But seeing the rest of your post about Jersey Boys and Legally Blonde made me realize there's not much I could say about larger commercial shows. I have very little interest in shows like the two you mentioned here, and didn't bother to see them while I was in London, so I don't know what their student prices were. I guess I'm more concerned about the quality of theatre that is offered at any given price in either city. In London, I could get tickets (in advance, over the phone or even online) at the major fringe theatres and The National (as well as the Globe--a commercial theatre with no government funding) for FREE, or for as little as five or ten pounds. It seems that in New York, I can get student rush at our major not-for-profits for as little as $15 up to $30 or more with harder-to-get student rush tickets or with a hit-or-miss lotto. For every one student ticket I buy in New York, I was able to get, two, three, four, five in London. I'd still be paying less than I would be to go to the cinema in New York for most single tickets there. Subsidized, not-for-profit, commercial, WHATEVER the situation, it saddens me that in New York, top-quality theatre is NOT so readily available at that cheap of a price.

"For those of you who must have theater or die - how about attending less expensive theater? How about going to off broadway, regional, and local theater?

How about continuing doing the lotto, rush, and student discounts? How about saving up some money? "
As I belabored above, even at that level, I could see more theatre, better theatre for less money than I would pay for off-Broadway shows in London. My thought is...if the Brits could figure that one out, why can't we make this happen in our country?

My thought is...if the Brits could figure that one out, why can't we make this happen in our country?

Because all that extra funding comes from higher taxes paid in the UK. So, indirectly they do pay more for tickets and tourists benefit by getting the low prices also.

I'm not saying we shouldn't support the arts more in the US, just saying it's not as if the Brits have some brilliant idea we're not using. Which is not to say that they don't do some(many?) things better than us, it's just that, as with health care, Europeans are willing to pay higher taxes in order to get services for "free" or at reduced cost. Unfortunately, I don't see that flying with John Q. Public in the USA.

Updated On: 1/17/10 at 07:50 PM

"Clearly there are people who are able to fork over 120 bucks for a Broadway show, that is why they do it. "

Yes. However these are not the people that are going to fill theaters month after month. People paying $120 are most likely out of town people who see a show on Broadway MAYBE once a year. What about us people that live in NY, or around the NY area, or visit frequently? We're the people that are going to see the shows most and so it's important prices accomadate us, too.

I pay full price and I see shows maybe once a week or 2 weeks and live in PA which is fairly close to NYC.

As for the rest of this whole thread if I have the money I get full priced tickets. To get the better/full priced seats I will take the bus and not the train, I will stay in a hostel and not some fancy hotel, I will bring my own food and not eat out. It's all about saving money one place to be able to afford the more expensive seats. Now I don't get full priced tickets all the time, if I am short on cash or want to see a lot of shows I will sit in the last few rows of the mezz/balcony, do lotteries and SRO to save that way. Like random people on here said "where there's a will there's a way".

---