#26
Posted: 5/15/14 at 10:36am
tazber-of course it is. But it gets your attention, and hopefully gets you to focus on the wrongness of the current system of purchased ego gratification.
No more Tony Medallions? — Page 2
#27
Posted: 5/15/14 at 11:10am
hopefully gets you to focus
No. Your hope is misplaced. It just makes you sound like someone who uses wildly inaccurate analogies.
No. Your hope is misplaced. It just makes you sound like someone who uses wildly inaccurate analogies.
#28
Posted: 5/15/14 at 12:12pm
Without backers there are no shows and therefore no Awards. Let them buy the statuette because without them there is no show.
#29
Posted: 5/15/14 at 1:39pm
This has been going on forever. The truth is that Tony Award Productions needs the cash the sales bring in which is why they're still selling them. And on a side note, there is a difference between a producer and an investor.
#30
Posted: 5/15/14 at 1:56pm
Wilmington re your side note--yes there is. The entire issue here is a result of labeling the latter as the former.
re the cash need-first of all, at RCMH, that's not really true. secondly, money is a lousy reason to do something that diminishes your brand. Finally, if they really need more money, the amount these trophies bring in could easily be raised from a further assessment across the board. In the scheme of things, it is not a lot of money.
re the cash need-first of all, at RCMH, that's not really true. secondly, money is a lousy reason to do something that diminishes your brand. Finally, if they really need more money, the amount these trophies bring in could easily be raised from a further assessment across the board. In the scheme of things, it is not a lot of money.
#31
money is a lousy reason to do something that diminishes your brand
Again, which this does not do.
If only 2 of the 28 producers of A GENTLEMAN'S GUIDE TO LOVE AND MURDER are given medallions and the other 26 are allowed to purchase a medallion for $2500, Audra McDonald's Tonys are in no way diminished.
I repeat (because I'm sure you will continue to go on repeating the word "diminish"), Audra McDonald's Tonys are in no way diminished.
Audra McDonald's Tonys are in no way diminished.
Not one of Audra McDonald's Tonys would be harmed in the engraving of those 26 medallions.
Not ONE.
Posted: 5/15/14 at 2:03pm
money is a lousy reason to do something that diminishes your brand
Again, which this does not do.
If only 2 of the 28 producers of A GENTLEMAN'S GUIDE TO LOVE AND MURDER are given medallions and the other 26 are allowed to purchase a medallion for $2500, Audra McDonald's Tonys are in no way diminished.
I repeat (because I'm sure you will continue to go on repeating the word "diminish"), Audra McDonald's Tonys are in no way diminished.
Audra McDonald's Tonys are in no way diminished.
Not one of Audra McDonald's Tonys would be harmed in the engraving of those 26 medallions.
Not ONE.
#33
Posted: 5/15/14 at 3:44pm
That can be your opinion, PalJoey, but it is not mine, nor is it that of the owners of the brand.
#34
Posted: 5/15/14 at 3:46pm
My response was to HogansHero. PJ beat me to the "post."
#35
I also believe that your endlessly referring to it as a "brand" diminishes the history and integrity of Tonys as an artistic award.
Posted: 5/15/14 at 4:12pm
I also believe that your endlessly referring to it as a "brand" diminishes the history and integrity of Tonys as an artistic award.
#36
Posted: 5/15/14 at 5:04pm
PayJoey-fine. feel free to substitute "award" for "brand." The bottom line is, when you own something, you get to decide what is good for it and what is bad for it. The Wing is the steward of the award, just as a writer's literary representative is the steward of one's work, and can decide that having too many productions of a play diminishes the property, even if you desperately want to see a revival of it.
#37
Posted: 5/15/14 at 5:15pm
But when you say "diminishes the property," aren't you really saying "the commercial value of the property"?
#38
Posted: 5/15/14 at 5:18pm
I'm also unclear how this dilutes the integrity of the award. As it stands in the Tony winner archives- ALL producers are listed as nominees/winners for a production. They're already being formally acknowledged. Why not give them the award they're apparently winning if they are willing to pay for it?
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
#39
Posted: 5/15/14 at 5:42pm
Reg-as it relates to playwrights, yes that's often (but not always) the reason.
Kad-you make a good point. My guess is that the same folks pushing the trophy issue will be back next with a restriction on who is listed and, even more, who is allowed on stage. There are a number of people vocally opposed to the embarrassing spectacle that we see often now especially on musicals. The bottom line is that you ought not to be able to buy a Tony, any more than you ought to be able to buy any award. Yet right now, if you have enough money, you can definitely buy one.
Kad-you make a good point. My guess is that the same folks pushing the trophy issue will be back next with a restriction on who is listed and, even more, who is allowed on stage. There are a number of people vocally opposed to the embarrassing spectacle that we see often now especially on musicals. The bottom line is that you ought not to be able to buy a Tony, any more than you ought to be able to buy any award. Yet right now, if you have enough money, you can definitely buy one.
#40
Posted: 5/15/14 at 5:54pm
The value that is diminished is the value of the physical pieces, not (as PalJoey has already said a hundred times) the value of the actual award itself. I don't think they are even claiming that the extra statues are diminishing the value of the award, only the physical statues. But why does the value of the physical statue matter? Whether Audra's statues cost $5 each or $1000 each, it doesn't change the recognition and value of the award.
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
#41
Posted: 5/15/14 at 6:08pm
qolbinau-no, they are talking about the integrity (and hence the value in non-monetary terms) of the award. As you say, the value of the physical statue doesn't mean anything. Why would the Wing care about the value of the physical thing? From that standpoint, they require non-transfer covenants anyway, so from their perspective and by their design there is no cash value .
#42
Posted: 5/15/14 at 6:15pm
But this has been going on for a long time and thus far the prestige and value of the Tony remains intact.
....but the world goes 'round
#43
Posted: 5/15/14 at 7:19pm
Tazber is right and PJ is right. To be honest, until they brought it up no one even really knew this was happening, so who cares? It diminishes nothing.
The Tonys value has been denigrated by the world of entertainment and media expanding to the point where many people dont even know what a Tony is. The Wing should work on creating more visibility and not about diluting a 'brand" that loses visibility and impact with each passing year.
Without producers, these musicals would be playing in the creative teams basement. I, for one, know that the touring houses, who often invest heavily in shows they believe will do well on the road are very proud of their medallions and how they can contribute to the magic of Broadway from a smaller city. There is nothing inauthentic about it. Actually, it EMBODIES the spirit of the Tonys.
As usual, the Wing are out of touch. A day late and a dollar short.
The Tonys value has been denigrated by the world of entertainment and media expanding to the point where many people dont even know what a Tony is. The Wing should work on creating more visibility and not about diluting a 'brand" that loses visibility and impact with each passing year.
Without producers, these musicals would be playing in the creative teams basement. I, for one, know that the touring houses, who often invest heavily in shows they believe will do well on the road are very proud of their medallions and how they can contribute to the magic of Broadway from a smaller city. There is nothing inauthentic about it. Actually, it EMBODIES the spirit of the Tonys.
As usual, the Wing are out of touch. A day late and a dollar short.
"The sexual energy between the mother and son really concerns me!"-random woman behind me at Next to Normal
"I want to meet him after and bang him!"-random woman who exposed her breasts at Rock of Ages, referring to James Carpinello
#44
Posted: 5/15/14 at 7:22pm
I think the Wing has a longer perspective on it.
#45
Posted: 5/15/14 at 7:28pm
"Yet right now, if you have enough money, you can definitely buy one."
Well, no. Right now, if you have enough money, you can buy the trophy that represents the award you already won. Or am I really misunderstanding?
Well, no. Right now, if you have enough money, you can buy the trophy that represents the award you already won. Or am I really misunderstanding?
#46
Posted: 5/15/14 at 8:50pm
And no....it's not about having the money to buy one. You or I cannot simply buy one. We have to be already affiliated with and recognized by the Tony committee as a producer.
If my $$ is good enough to accept to get the show running, and that show goes on to win one of the big four, why SHOULDN'T I be able to pay for the priviledge of have the momento of the occasion?
If they want to officially make the distinction between investor and producer, I have no problem with that either.
If my $$ is good enough to accept to get the show running, and that show goes on to win one of the big four, why SHOULDN'T I be able to pay for the priviledge of have the momento of the occasion?
If they want to officially make the distinction between investor and producer, I have no problem with that either.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
#47
Posted: 5/15/14 at 10:01pm
Reg-You may not have misunderstood; I wasn't that clear. If you have enough money to invest in enough shows, one will win. So without too much effort, one can indeed buy the fireplace bling, and they do. (Incidentally, it's also a decent investment strategy to invest in most shows across the board. If you leave out the obvious dogs, when you do the math, you'll see that you end up with a positive result because the downside risk is limited and the upside reward is not.)
Drama-as I explained above, if you have the funds, you can always back the winner. As to why you shouldn't be able to... in what other investment do you get a momento in such circumstances? If you invest in a building that wins the Pritzker, you do not share in it. If you invest in a hockey team, you don't get to take the Stanley Cup home. But if you have no problem with a distinction, then you should have no problem with what the wing is contemplating.
Drama-as I explained above, if you have the funds, you can always back the winner. As to why you shouldn't be able to... in what other investment do you get a momento in such circumstances? If you invest in a building that wins the Pritzker, you do not share in it. If you invest in a hockey team, you don't get to take the Stanley Cup home. But if you have no problem with a distinction, then you should have no problem with what the wing is contemplating.
#48
Posted: 5/15/14 at 10:38pm
There IS only one Stanley Cup....so that analagy makes no sense. ONE, and it moves to the current winner. There ARE multiple Tony Awards every year.
BTW....I never said I had a problem with what they are considering. I just can see both sides of the "concern". Personally, its their argument that I don't get....that it somehow devalues the award.
BTW....I never said I had a problem with what they are considering. I just can see both sides of the "concern". Personally, its their argument that I don't get....that it somehow devalues the award.
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
#49
Posted: 5/15/14 at 11:01pm
Drama-do you really think it does not diminish an award when it is given to people who didn't work on the show? (It's your right to feel that way; I just don't get it.)
In kindergarten, everyone gets a prize just for participating. As we grow up, we only get prizes for merit. A Tony sitting on the mantle of someone in Greenwich is bling, not an award. It's what you get for over the fireplace in the library. For the garage, you get a Lamborghini.
In kindergarten, everyone gets a prize just for participating. As we grow up, we only get prizes for merit. A Tony sitting on the mantle of someone in Greenwich is bling, not an award. It's what you get for over the fireplace in the library. For the garage, you get a Lamborghini.
#50
Posted: 5/15/14 at 11:13pm
I might be able to agree with you if the committee issued some guidelines about who's a producer and who's not--that is, what, specifically, you have to do to be considered a "real" producer. But I don't think that's how the business is set up at present.
I'm probably showing my ignorance here, but I'm not sure I understand how even the realest of producers equates with the director, set designer, etc., in terms of creative input.
I'm probably showing my ignorance here, but I'm not sure I understand how even the realest of producers equates with the director, set designer, etc., in terms of creative input.
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95