No more Tony Medallions?

[Knowitall]

Posted: 5/13/14 at 10:33pm

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/American-Theater-Wing-to-Stop-Selling-Tony-Medallions-to-Producers-20140513#.U3LVqty6xXU

Broadway is a very high risk investment proposition. Take away the Tony and let's see how many investors are going to support producers. Good luck!

[WayTooBroadway]

Posted: 5/13/14 at 10:55pm

"The American Theatre Wing's Tony Awards® got their start in 1947 when the Wing established an awards program to celebrate excellence in the theatre."

I think the description says it all.

[Knowitall]

Posted: 5/13/14 at 11:14pm

Excellence in the theatre is not related to producers getting medallions. Investors who are hesitant to invest on Broadway will walk away.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 5/13/14 at 11:30pm

It sounds like the program helps with revenue, no? So why take it away?

[dramamama611]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 5:41am

Hm. Tough one.

On one hand, why would anyone care? If my neighbor put $ in a show, would I, IN ANY WAY, be affected by him/her shelling out more money so commemorate that event? Nope, not at all.

On the other hand, is ANYONE that has invested money currently eligible? That's a lot of people. Did they REALLY have that much to do with the success of the show, or is it more like the stock market?

I guess, that overall, I don't see how it makes a hill of beans of difference. Maybe they just add a line on the engraving that states: Investor's Commemorative Award and let it be.

[haterobics]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 8:46am

For those who only read the headline, the actual story says the group "is proposing to stop selling Tony medallion trophies to investors who back Broadway shows." Nothing official yet.

[Brian07663NJ]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 8:47am

If you participated and invested - why not.
I do not think it dilutes it. Consider shows that need a collection of smaller investors to pool their resources to stand behind a show they believe in. Why should only the 2 who put in that extra $1 be eligible to get one? It is not like these are floating all over eBay to easily purchase.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 9:51am

"There is a real desire within the Wing to make sure the Tony medallion remains prestigious," playwright David Henry Hwang, board member for the Wing, told the Times. "It's important -- certainly to those of us who are artists -- that the Tony not be diluted by its widespread sale.

What a silly thing to worry about.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 10:48am

"What a silly thing to worry about."

Not if you have an award or don't constitute the weaker but legitimizing partner in the award giving enterprise

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 1:56pm

Not if you have an award or don't constitute the weaker but legitimizing partner in the award giving enterprise

What does that even mean?

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 2:50pm

Maintaining the integrity of the award is not silly (a) to folks who have the trophy on their mantle, or (b) to the Wing, which is the steward of the award's legitimacy against the League's more corrupt interests. I can't be much clearer than that. It is easy to find things silly from the vantage point of having nothing at stake.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 3:00pm

What's silly is suggesting that selling medallions to people who have won the awards is in any way damaging the integrity of the award.

If I were one of a dozen producers of a show that won the award and they gave the lead producers only two actual awards, I'm sure I would be delighted to give them $2,500 so that I could have one for my own mantlepiece. (If I had a mantlepiece...)

And you know what? I think you would be delighted too.

And you know what else? Our Tony awards would IN NO WAY diminish Audra McDonald's achievements.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 3:29pm

Paljoey, that is your opinion. Inherent in what I said is that you have nothing at stake. Obviously, there are those who feel strongly to the contrary (as evidenced by the move that is afoot), and they DO have something at stake. I do not want an award for doing nothing worthy of it, whether free or for $2500.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 3:42pm

I had beef medallions for lunch. They were free.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 3:50pm

I do not want an award for doing nothing worthy of it, whether free or for $2500

You believe producers do nothing worthy?

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 3:55pm

What does Hogan's Heroes have at stake?

[tazber]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 3:58pm

I must not be understanding the controversy because if your show won why wouldn't you want a Tony?

I'm not getting how the sale of medallions to producers of AWARD WINNING shows dilutes anything.

It's not like anyone can buy one. Your show still has to have won, right?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 4:23pm

The $2500 option is open ONLY to producers of WINNING shows in these categories:

Best Play
Best Musical
Best Play Revival
Best Musical Revival

Granted a show like Gentleman's Guide to Love and Murder can have something like 28 producers, but that's just the nature of the theater today. Minus one of those 28, and the show might not have made it to Broadway.

The Jeremy Gerard article linked below explains the background of this ridiculous battle, although he calls them "Phony Tonys."



DEALINE.COM: Hey Big Spender! Tony Awards For Sale, $2,500 – Get ‘Em While They Last!

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 6:04pm

Real producers do lots worthy. Phony producers don't. That's what this is about. the Tonys should not be pay to play. You don't have to agree. That's why there is a debate going on. But Mr. Long and Mr. Hwang are not raising something that is silly.

[haterobics]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 6:11pm

They should just stop calling every backer with no creative input to a show a producer, then there would be no controversy/issue.

If people got the same financial benefit from a hit show, without the title of producer, would they still invest? I'd imagine so. Or is there some cachet in saying you're a producer that is really what loosens the purse strings, moreso than the dream of seeing your money ever again?

[uncageg]

Posted: 5/14/14 at 8:41pm

Thank you for the laugh Phyllis. I actually needed it!

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 5/15/14 at 3:43am

You believe producers do nothing worthy?

I don't think he is insinuating that the producers do nothing, I think he is insinuating that the investors do nothing other than put up the money. I have noticed in the past that the words producer and investor get used interchangeably a lot around here, and that should not be.

That being said, if I put up money for a show and it won a Tony award, I would want something acknowledging my contribution to the award winning piece.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 5/15/14 at 9:22am

Jimmy-you're right of course. The lax use of the term producer here, however, is a function of how it is used in the credits on productions. Those advocating limiting the trophies agree that there should be some recognition of these investor/producers, but that it should be something other than the mantle-gracing trophies that they now buy. The current scheme is essentially the equivalent of giving a composer's parents a Tony for best score because they paid for his or her musical education.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 5/15/14 at 9:25am

No, it's not.

[tazber]

Posted: 5/15/14 at 10:04am

The current scheme is essentially the equivalent of giving a composer's parents a Tony for best score because they paid for his or her musical education.

That is an wildly inaccurate analogy.