Public Advocate Says ‘Spider-Man’ May Violate Consumer Protection Laws

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 3:22pm

This is pretty interesting:

"In a letter sent to the city’s Department of Consumer Affairs, Mr. de Blasio warned that the Broadway musical 'Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark' may be violating consumer protection laws by not clearly distinguishing its preview period (when the show is still considered a work in progress) from its post-opening performances (when the show is a finished product), and could face fines.

Noting the premium cost of Broadway tickets, which can run $150 or more, Mr. de Blasio wrote: 'At those prices, consumers deserve to know what they are purchasing, and there is a real difference between seeing an unfinished show in previews versus one that has officially opened. That many shows do not advertise that they are in previews, either in promotions or at the point of ticket sales, is unacceptable.'"



I know this has been discussed here, but I find it interesting that it's coming up now (although apparently also was an issue with Nick & Nora) with Spider-Man. Just based on the ad I saw on the PATH that said the reviews were in (which, to me, makes it sound as though the show has opened), I'd say they're being less than forthcoming in the marketing arena.
Article on the NY Times website

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 3:26pm

A lot of Broadway shows don't distinguish between previews and post opening. Spider-Man is not the first.

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 3:32pm

I know a lot of shows will have "Now in previews!" on their official websites, but I'm not sure it's obvious when you're on Telecharge or Ticketmaster (and certainly not when you're on line at TKTS).

Like I said in my post, though, it does seem like Spider-Man is trying to promote itself as a complete, ready piece of theatre when it's not. Although I do still think it's interesting that this issue is being brought up specifically with Spider-Man.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 3:32pm

I remember a time when, if a show was opening cold in NYC, with a short preview period, preview tickets were less than for the regular run; one of the downsides was that all you got for a program was a single sheet, listing the play, the actors, number of acts, etc. This happened to me when I saw a preview performancece of Edward Albee's A Delicate Balance back in 1966.

[B3TA07]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 3:41pm

I've found this topic comes up much more often when the show sucks...

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 3:42pm

wow i guess they should be looking in to a lot of Broadway Shows then since hardly any say they are in previews.
All preview shows are a work in progress and charge high pricess, it just seems Spider - Man is getting singled out for the purpose just to knock it now.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 3:44pm

I agree that shows should make more of an effort to make the general public more aware of the difference between a preview performance and a regular performance and to let them know what they're buying, but at the same time a Broadway show playing a certain amount of preview performances before officially opening is a time honored tradition that most regular theatregoers are completely aware of and I don't think he has much of a case. With all the publicity Spider-Man has received I can remember several news segments mentioning that the show has yet to open and then giving the date of the opening night.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 3:59pm

wow i guess they should be looking in to a lot of Broadway Shows then since hardly any say they are in previews.
All preview shows are a work in progress and charge high pricess, it just seems Spider - Man is getting singled out for the purpose just to knock it now.

The article cites Spiderman as one such example. However, it makes quite clear they're looking into all shows, and have alerted the League. Charlotte St. Martin, the League's director has said she's speaking with producers of all shows, not just Spiderman.

[tazber]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 4:16pm

And don't forget that with Spiderman people have purchased tickets for a show that was supposed to be open and set already.

Are all ticketholders informed that they tix they bought are now for a preview and given a choice of rescheduling or being refunded?

That's not rhetorical btw, I am genuinely asking what Spiderman's policy has been in terms of letting patrons know that the show is still in previews.

[winston89]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 4:18pm

The average Joe theatre goer ( not any of us, those who see a show or two while on vacation in NYC just because of the fact that they are in NYC) sees a show for the sake of seeing a show in NYC. They also know that theatre is not cheap on Broadway and is not shocked to find out that the are going to have to shell out 120 plus dollars per ticket. However, what they don't know is the difference between a preview and a show being in its frozen state. Therefor, if they wish to sue the show or whatever, due to the fact that they aren't announcing the fact that a show is in previews ( the case with Spider-Man is bogus due to the fact that the news has said on more then one occasion that the show has yet to open up and is in previews) is not new. I can't tell you the number of times a show says in advertising something to the effect of "performances begin" or "now playing on Broadway." Both of those things are accurate when talking about a show in previews as well as a show that is open and playing.

There is nothing wrong going on here. If they are to say that the producers must announce that the show is in fact in previews and not open and frozen, then they would have to educate the average jo who wouldn't care nor no the difference between the two.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 4:42pm

I don't think they'd need to educate anyone. Anyone who knows what the word "preview" means would understand the difference. Even the "average jos", as you call them.

[sondheimfan2]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 4:52pm

Just as in the old days (The last show I saw in previews at a reduced rate was INTO THE WOODS - OBC), previews should be discounted and advertised as much.

Posted: 1/7/11 at 5:29pm

So does the fact that the show is currently selling 100% of it's tickets each weak make any difference in this discussion?

[fingerlakessinger]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 5:31pm

How much were shows discounted when they did give discounts for previews? I heard they were as much as 50% off...

[Radioactiveduck]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 9:12pm

With all the VERY PUBLIC discussion about the show's Opening Night getting pushed back twice, I think it should be obvious to patrons that the show is still in previews. Also, it's not like previews are some brand new thing to Broadway...granted most shows don't open cold on B'way, but still...I think you'd be hard pressed to find an audience member willing to sue because they didn't know the show was "in previews" vs. "officially open."

This guy is just trying to make a name for himself by being a vulture.

[winston89]

Posted: 1/7/11 at 10:51pm

Also, it's not like there is any official rule that says that shows that are in previews have to sell tickets at half price or anything of that nature. While it is nice that they do, we shouldn't talk about shows doing this during their preview period as if it is something that they MUST do.

While I do agree with the idea that when a show starts previews the work is not officially over yet, therefor, it is not fair to have someone pay the price they would pay for a finished work VS one that is not done yet. However, I can see where the producers come from as well. Specially for a show like Spider-Man, I can see that their mindset is that it is going to take them a lot of time to make any money off of a given show. So, why not start the attempted to make back some of that money from early on.

[Radioactiveduck]

Posted: 1/8/11 at 5:03pm

That's a good point, Winston, which made me think of something else.

The producers don't get a discount on their weekly operating budget just because it's previews. The show still costs a million dollars a week, and with the exception of this last week (where the gross managed to double somehow), they've just BARELY been making it.

PS - Does anyone know how the gross managed to go from 900K to 1.8 mil in one week?

[scott68]

Posted: 1/8/11 at 5:07pm

The 900k was from four performances, as it didn't include the performance at which the actor was injured or the two canceled performances that followed. (That week had originally been planned as a seven-show week.) The following week's grosses included a full eight performances.

[TheatreDork3]

Posted: 1/9/11 at 3:06pm

I found this article very interesting. I think a discussion is going to be had eventually on the purpose of previews and how producers handle previews. I believe that previews are necessary, but do not agree that producer's should have a right to sell tickets at full price. While there are still some discounts available for Spiderman (I received a new discount code a couple of days ago), most of the tickets being sold are for full price. That's the theater side of me speaking.

Then there's the business side of me who has no problem with what the producers are doing. They are selling a commodity that people are clearly willing to pay for. Should every product producer be required to tell you that they are tinkering with a product to make it better when you buy it. How many people ran out to buy i-pads? Was Macintosh obligated to let everyone know that future generations were already in works to fix problems? While not a great comparison, I think the public needs to be more aware in general. Anyone who does not know that they are seeing a preview is uneducated about the theater business. Now, I do believe that people who bought tickets for after the opening date originally should be allowed to transfer those tickets to shows post opening and not for the preview period, but that's a different issue altogether.

TD