Official Kickstarter to get Spring Awakening to perform on the Tonys — Page 5

NJ_BroadwayGirl said: "Seriously, how is this any different from any other show asking the public to pay for their performance?



"

When has a show asked the public to help fund its Tony appearance? Not trying to be snarky, genuinely curious if something like this has happened and how it turned out.

seahag2 said: "NJ_BroadwayGirl said: "Seriously, how is this any different from any other show asking the public to pay for their performance?"

When has a show asked the public to help fund its Tony appearance? Not trying to be snarky, genuinely curious if something like this has happened and how it turned out"

I don't know that any other show has which is what I was addressing. It's absolutely ridiculous that this funding campaign exists. I imagine some donors are superfans who wouldn't care either way but some are being manipulated and certainly wouldn't donate if Shuffle Along or Bright Star asked for money. As Kad said, it's a commercial production masquerading as a charity case.

Right, that's exactly the problem. They want to have their cake and eat it too-- they want this but not enough to pay for it themselves.

"And while Davenport is supporting their efforts, I'm not sure how that qualifies as "hiding behind a non-profit,""



It's hiding behind a non profit because they're saying your donation to a commercial enterprise on a national TV show is tax deductible. You see the problem here?

The donation is being made to the non-profit theater company with complete transparency as to what they intend to spend it on. There's nothing untoward about that. Hogan, I suspect you're correct - I said as much in my post - and it may have been better had they said we have an angel who's agreed to foot the bill and we'd like to pay them back. Not quite as effective in terms of launching a fundraising campaign.

Curious, has anyone seen the show announced on any touring theaters 2016-17 schedule?

I think this revival was stellar and I would love to see it perform on the Tonys.

But, given the details and timeline, framing this as a donation to a (very worthy) non-profit seems misleading. This looks like a situation in which the thing being Kickstarted is already financed, and all the money raised is going to pay that back. So, yes, technically it is a donation to Deaf West. But it's not money that Deaf West is actually seeing, it's money being used to pay back potentially commercial entities.

The issue I have- and what I suppose others have- is that this is being framed as "a little theatre company that could" narrative when it's really "repay commercial producers who really believe in this project but have deemed it not fiscally responsible to foot this bill so they will take your money."

Wilmingtom said: "Neon, when you call DW to make a donation, or submit it on their site, where do you think the money goes if not to them?"



I don't understand what you aren't getting. Money donated directly to Deaf West DOES go to them. This Kickstarter DOES NOT.

Any ideas what happens if/when this Kickstarter is overfunded?

And any idea what happens if they don't reach the goal? The cast will still perform on tv, they can't back out I'm guessing.

neonlightsxo said: "Wilmingtom said: "Neon, when you call DW to make a donation, or submit it on their site, where do you think the money goes if not to them?"

I don't understand what you aren't getting. Money donated directly to Deaf West DOES go to them. This Kickstarter DOES NOT."

This Kickstarter is attached to the Deaf West Theater account, which means it's attached to them financially. The money is going directly to them. Even if someone (or many people) fronted the bills for the performance, if they are getting paid back by Deaf West that means ultimately the money is coming from Deaf West, and someone was willing to help them out in the interim.

This is not Lion King or Spongebob the Musical, this is a tough sell and does not easily rake in the big bucks, but it is a beautiful, once-in-a-lifetime production. Maybe it needs to be slightly subsidized compared to other shows. It's important and has touched many people, and some are more than willing to pitch in a little bit (or a lot for those who easily can) to something they believe is an important cause worth further promoting on national television. It would be a shame if they were the only show nominated for Best Revival of a Musical that could not perform because they can't afford it. If fans think it's worth footing the bill, let them do it- it's their money. Earlier this year a gentleman subsidized the Spring Awakening lottery to give all of the winners free tickets, and that was just because he loved this show and wanted to share it with people who couldn't afford it.

Yes, Ken Davenport has very iffy Marketing tactics that I think he definitely needs to work on, agreed.

But in the end of the day as I see it this particular cause is for Deaf West.

Updated On: 5/25/16 at 02:59 PM

Wilmingtom said: "Kad, while I understand your well-taken points, I don't begrudge DW for trying to reimburse whoever agreed to bankroll their appearance. I believe their efforts are sincere."

I don't begrudge DW at all!

I begrudge Davenport et al who champion the company but have deemed supporting their Tony performance as fiscally irresponsible, yet have put up the money and left DW to Kickstart their reimbursement. And that's what this is: a crowdsourced reimbursement of (presumably) Davenport and the co-producers.

I think Davenport has to put his money where his mouth is instead of trying to pass off producing responsibilities to the public.