Ken Davenport- Page 2

[Kad]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 2:32pm

Davenport didn't produce Afterglow. He just owns the venue.

[JSquared2]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 2:35pm

Annoying thing # 187:  He bought a theater and named it after himself.

 

[raddersons]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 3:20pm

haterobics said: "raddersons said: "Not to mention, anyone notice Afterglow isn't on Did He Like It?"

Did you notice there are only 6 total Off-Broadway reviews?"

Oh, come on. That’s only of long running shows. Most mid to high profile off-bway shows are covered, but since most have a limited run, they don’t stay on the site for a long time. Afterglow should be there. It’s not.

Kad, I still find owning the theater a conflict of interest.

At the end of the day, no producer should be running a review site... even a review aggregate site. But especially not one where the owner gets to interpret reviews and apply a “thumbs up” or “thumbs down”

Updated On: 7/30/18 at 03:20 PM

[zainmax]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 3:34pm

JSquared2 said: "Annoying thing # 187: He bought a theater and named itafter himself.

"

Isn't it technically named after his grandfather, who was really Davenport?

Ken was Hjidsah or something. Changed his name.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 3:37pm

Hasija.

[SomethingPeculiar]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 3:47pm

JSquared2 said: "Annoying thing # 187: He bought a theater and named itafter himself."

Eh, I don't think that's a big deal. Daryl Roth named a theatre after herself. The Shubert and Nederlander organizations all have theatres named after their executives/owners. 

[haterobics]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 4:02pm

raddersons said: "Oh,come on. That’s only of long running shows. Most mid to highprofile off-bway shows are covered, but since most have a limited run, they don’t stay on the site for a long time. Afterglow should be there. It’s not."

What am I missing? If you go to the site and click Off-Broadway Reviews, there are only six things there?!

http://www.didhelikeit.com/category/show/off-broadway

[GVS2]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 6:14pm

Last fall, I wanted to find out more about the creation and production of Broadway shows.  After completing a simple search in hopes of finding a few books or websites to guide my curiosity, I was presented with Ken's conference that was a few weeks away.  On a gut feeling, I decided that hearing from experts in the field would be an interesting way to perhaps answer my questions.  (I have attended other workshops or have taken courses in a variety of fields in a similar way.  Several years ago, I even took a weekend course on sustainable farming because I wanted to know more about food production.)

The conference I attended last November was a life-changing experience in many ways.  Ken Davenport was the organizer, but he only spoke for perhaps 10 minutes at most.  The other presenters and moderators shared their knowledge and insight over the course of two days on a variety of topics pertaining to Broadway.  What Ken organized was just amazing.  So amazing, that I booked my spot for this year's conference almost immediately after receiving the first e-mail.

Just last week, I attended one of the previews to Gettin' the Band Back Together.  As I was walking out with a friend, I noticed Ken speaking with several other people by the entrance to the theater.  I waited until I had the opportunity to thank him for the experience last November.  Ken does not know me whatsoever, but he was kind and gracious.

When I saw that there was a post specifically dedicated to Ken Davenport, I was surprised.  Having only joined BroadwayWorld's message boards not long ago, I did not think I would be replying as much as I have.  To be honest, I started replying because I wanted to share my excitement for Girl from the North Country, which I was fortunate enough to see at the Old Vic and on the West End.  When I saw so much criticism about Ken from people I assume he has had little to no interaction with, I thought I would offer another perspective.  Although he may have marketing and advertising strategies that people oppose, there is risk and creativity in some of these strategies, which should be commended.  This is especially true in a field as creative as Broadway.  I am so thankful for his conference that he created as another way to bring new people into the fold.  I am sure some people scoffed at the thought of a conference about producing Broadway shows when it was first announced, but I know that it was one of the best learning experiences that I have ever had.

(p.s.  I am NOT Ken Davenport, or anyone who works for him.  I figured I would beat someone to that punch.)

[Phillytheatreguy10]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 6:17pm

I find Rudin way more repulsive- IMO Davenport tries to make theatre accessible and Rudin tries to make it exclusive.  Also, OOTI is a Davenport show, so he has more than one hit and a Tony on his mantle.

[itsjustmejonhotmailcom]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 9:47pm

OOTI is not a hit by any measure.

[itsjustmejonhotmailcom]

Posted: 7/30/18 at 9:49pm

There's a non-profit, The Commercial Theatre Institute, that offers much more in-depth training to new producers and that is also respected by the industry. 

[UncleCharlie]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 12:55am

itsjustmejonhotmailcom said: "OOTI is not a hit by any measure."

The Tony Award for Best Revival of a Musical sitting in Ken's office would seem to indicate otherwise.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 1:19am

Sorry UncleCharlie but it's a big fat flop. Find a different word to described a well received and recognized show but a hit it is not. 

[UncleCharlie]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 3:43am

Hogan, the comment I responded to was "not a hit by any measure". It may not be a hit financially, but it is a hit artistically and critically.. And if you're going to reply that a hit signifies financial success only, then you can use your definition of success and I'll use mine however incorrect, non-traditional and wrong mine may be in your eyes. And truthfully, maybe it's high time the strict usage of "hit" that folks like you so aggressively defend and cling to should be changed to "financial success" and the more general term hit be applied to a variety of criteria that can define a show's success across various measures. The daily scolding that people get for daring to even imply that a show that hasn't completely broken even has been some form of a hit are among the silliest discussions on here.

[itsjustmejonhotmailcom]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 10:21am

UncleCharlie, there already is agreed upon definition of a "hit" within the industry; it refers to a show that is financially successful.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 11:10am

@UncleCharlie, I don't want to restrict what words you choose to use; have at it. At the same time, you are on a board where people, you included, are aware that there are terms of art in this business and they have specific meanings. You can take the same position regarding, say, soundtrack vs cast recording, but when you do it is at your own peril. 

In my other interest at this time of year, baseball, we also have the word "hit" and it has a particular meaning. Yet someone could say that a batter "got a hit" when his bat connected with the ball and it flew through the air into into a fielder's glove, or when it made it into the fielder's glove but was dropped. That's an error, not a hit. 

[Ado Annie D'Ysquith]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 12:53pm

The phrase I use is a "Semi-Hit" when referring to productions that were critical/artistic successes but failed to recoup. It hasn't really caught on yet...Lol

[MarkBearSF]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 9:55pm

I'm surprised that I haven't read that baseball analogy for "hit" before, considering the frequency the topic appears (many with your posts, Hogan) I'd be tempted to use it, but not being a baseball fan and knowing the seriousness of stats to its fans, I'm afraid that I'd misuse a term and immediately forfeit my argument!

Updated On: 7/31/18 at 09:55 PM

[zainmax]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 10:14pm

Who is ryhog?

[MarkBearSF]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 10:56pm

zainmax said: "Who is ryhog?"

Sorry. I used a name from the "other board" by mistake. Fixed.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 11:08pm

beats me lol

BTW I actually just made up the analogy after I posted and went back and edited it. I'm not sure if it's really original or I just forgot where I heard it.

Updated On: 7/31/18 at 11:08 PM

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 11:16pm

HogansHero said: "Or (ironically) also have the temerity to charge people to "teach" them how to produce. "

Yeah, there's something shady about that website. Very Trump University. But since I don't go on it, all I can say is I'm glad he produces most of the shows he does (Spring Awakening, Daddy Long Legs, OOTI, etc.) and I ignore the bad ones, because most people would probably not take the risk on such money losing ventures. Of course, better producing might make them more financially successful but that's just conjecture.

[zainmax]

Posted: 7/31/18 at 11:43pm

Overall, Bway is probably better off with him than without him.

Can't say the same for Bway investors.

[UncleCharlie]

Posted: 8/1/18 at 12:02am

HogansHero said: "beats me lol

BTW I actually just made up the analogy after I posted and went back and edited it. I'm not sure if it's really original or I just forgot where I heard it. "

You shouldn't use it again Hogan. It's not a good one. No real baseball fan (or even a casual fan for that matter) would ever say someone "got a hit" when they made an out. No one would. If anything they would say they hit the ball hard or got good wood on the ball but never that they got a hit. Your analogy is what someone who doesn't know baseball at all would claim someone else would say to try to make a point. And if you said to a real fan, they "got a hit" that fan would almost always reply "what was it?" cause a real baseball fan knows that hit is a overarching general term and almost always requires further and more specific elaboration and categorization as to whether it was a single, double, triple, home run etc. Which actually is the way the theater industry should use "hit" if it was smart, as a general term requiring more specific elaboration as to whether you are referring to critical or financial success. But far be it from me to suggest what is uniformly agreed to by the entire industry as to the appropriate specific usage of a broad, vague term like "hit" should ever change to make more sense. I realize I am a heretic in suggesting this. 

You sound like you really know your baseball. Would love to get your take on who you feel won and who lost with today's non-waiver trade deadline moves.

[BobPopa]

Posted: 8/1/18 at 12:22am

Okay talking the "Financial" Hit category, since it's still running, has not recouped, but has not posted a closing notice, then then the fate of OOTI would be categorized as "TBD"

Going with that, do we have a guess as to what the weekly operating costs are on this show?? For playing the Circle in the Square, the grosses aren't bad, and the average ticket price is healthy. If it runs say at least until January 6 and stays north of $500,000 a week, does it have time to recoup, or is it in the Jekyll & Hyde  original production boat and can run for 4 years and still not recoup.