Riedel on The Great Comet off stage battle - PART 2

http://nypost.com/2016/10/20/possible-mutiny-brewing-at-josh-grobans-comet/

I have no knowledge of the situation, but I can't for the life of me figure out what is causing Kagan to be so bullheaded about this whole thing. Beyond hurting his own sense of ownership about the show (which he can't fully claim, since Ars Nova is more or less the reason it exists in the first place), why does he give a damn about this question of billing so much to the point of reneging on a previously agreed-upon contract. It's shockingly arrogant, and given the way Ars Nova has been instrumental in helping a lot of burgeoning artists, it's an absolute shame that he refuses to give them the credit they deserve.

I also don't understand why he even cares. Protest!

gypsy101 said: "what i don't understand is why the recording of the OBCR is scheduled for the same day as whatever gala they're talking about, it seems like whoever's in charge should have known the other was happening.



"

I believe this was used as a retaliation by the Kagans when Ars Nova demanded what they (rightfully) deserve in billing. If the recording was on the same day - many cast members (including Groban) wouldn't be able to attend the gala.

The whole thing is ridiculous. Its bad publicity for the show, the Kagans, and I think, frankly, Ars Nova as well.

I guess I get the power play, but he's still the lead producer- if the show wins Best Musical, it's not like he won't get to accept it. Plus, he's on the board of Ars anyway, so shouldn't he want the company to receive all of this positive attention? It's just baffling to me.

Well, he's not on the board anymore.

The schism has intensified sharply since it was first reported on Tuesday by The New York Post. Howard Kagan, a former Wall Street executive and a lead producer of the musical, has resigned from the board of Ars Nova, where he had been a top donor. And the nonprofit’s leadership, which had announced plans to honor Mr. Kagan and his co-producer wife, Janet, at its coming gala, instead on Wednesday took a step toward potential litigation, accusing Mr. Kagan of breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty to the nonprofit’s board.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/20/theater/three-words-lead-to-a-battle-over-great-comet-on-broadway.html

This link leads the the program from ART. Ars Nova gets billing at the bottom of page 5, as well as a blurb under creative team.

https://issuu.com/americanrep/docs/art_natashacomet_fin2/1

Different Drum said: "As P.T. Barnum said, "there's no such thing as bad publicity." This whole drama makes absolutely no sense - unless it was manufactured to generate press for a show that has already been around the block several times."

Aside from just reciting the canard, could you walk us through your theory of who manufactured this? Do you seriously think Jason Eagan is doing this for publicity? That strikes me as a phenomenally inept conspiracy theory.

Different Drum said: "As P.T. Barnum said, "there's no such thing as bad publicity." "

This mentality needs to stop.

GreenGables said: "As someone in a non-theatre related field (I'll let you guess which one based on my avatar), I wholeheartedly agree. BUT I would argue that this could be neutral to positive news for Ars Nova, who might draw some sympathetic donors (similar to what happened when the federal government de-funded planned parenthood). I also think it helps people remember Ars Nova was involved in the first place - something the general public (people who dont read BWW / Playbill) might not know / forget.

Interested to see if this show recoups. The Kagans have a pretty not-great track record (Bonnie & Clyde, Anarchist, Tuck), and this publicity won't help them"

You may be right as a collateral matter, but let's understand the causation. To believe this was a publicity stunt you have to believe that Kagan and Ars Nova conspired to create the dustup. I don't believe that for a minute. I know Jason (not well but well enough) and his reaction here is not calculated: this is stake through the heart territory for him.

Re Kagans, you left out the other doozy, On the Town.

wonderfulwizard11 said: "Right, I should have clarified. But even if he's not there any more, why would it bother him so much in the first place if he otherwise was working in support of them? "



I think only Howard knows the answer to that.

Updated On: 10/21/16 at 02:15 PM

QueenAlice said: "I suppose there might be some that sympathize with Ars Nova, but the only sympathizers who matter for a not-for-profit are the ones who might donate or be of some service to the organization. I frankly wouldn't want to donate to any organization that was threatening former board members with law suits. Even if they have cause, my red flag says 'stay away from trouble'. Ars Nova is new to the world of commercial transfer and frankly --there probably are some "i's" and "t's" on their contracts as related to this production that weren't dotted and crossed, which is the root cause of this issue. Again it just speaks to a vibe of amateurism."

Needless to say, you are entitled to react to Ars Nova any way you want, and needless to say different people will react in different ways. But regarding dotting the i's and crossing the t's, I would point out that like virtually all non-profits, even the tiny ones, there are these folks called lawyers who negotiate and write their contracts, and those lawyers didn't get off the turnip truck yesterday, even if you (rightly or wrongly) think the folks running the theatre did. Credits language is pretty boilerplate and I seriously doubt a defective contract is at the root of this problem. And your "vibe" BS betrays your lack of familiarity with what you are trying to throw shade over far more than it reflects on the highly regarded folks at Ars Nova.