Theater as an entitlement- Page 3

[After Eight]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 7:51pm

I actually like the idea of government subsidiaries (is that the right word?) for commercial Broadway shows to reduce ticket prices.

Subsidies?

[Fantod]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 8:02pm

Yup, that's the word I was looking for. Thanks.

[RaisedOnMusicals]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 8:24pm

Seperite, believe it or not, Broadway theater is, in a way, subsidized by the Federal government. It's a bit complicated, but bear with me and I'll try to explain.

If one, as an investor, invests in stock, for example, and the stock goes down and the investor sells at a loss, that is a capital loss which can offset capital gains but does not offset ordinary income. However, if an investor puts money into a Broadway show and sustains a loss (as most do), the investor can use that loss as a deduction against ordinary (regular earned) income. Now I don't know of any other type of investment losses that can offset ordinary income. (There might be a few, I'm not a CPA). So, the government has created a special tax rule specifically intended to encourage theater investment. And without investors willing to put their money into the highly speculative realm of investing in a theatrical production, you wouldn't have theater at all.

So in that way, the government does, in a way, subsidize theater. It just doesn't feel that way to the typical theater goer.

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 8:44pm

Fantod, - reading your last post, the first paragraph's wording sounds exactly like you copied it from some published essay on the history of theatre in America.

Your second paragraph sounds like your own words.

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 9:03pm

"Here's the bottom line for me.

Theater is a luxury. It is an art form that is experienced most often as an occasional treat by those who save their money and are willing to spend it on theater tickets.

I think it's wonderful that most Broadway theater producers, participants in an industry that, excepting the nonprofits, is private, takes it upon themselves to offer affordable options to ticket holders, such as rush, lottery and SRO. Yes, some shows need the rush tickets to fill seats, but do you not think shows like Wicked and BOM could easily sell their lottery seats for premium prices but instead offer them to those seeking a cheaper option?

To me, this shows that a private industry recognizes itself as a commodity and wants to make its product available to as many as possible. You don't see this as often with other fully commercial industries such as film or sports. "

Excellent post and I agree 100%.

[JamesBroadwayWiner]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 9:10pm

tens of thousands every week is a pretty small portion of the population.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 9:38pm

Does Equity no longer allow what used to be called "showcase" productions ("waiver" productions in LA)?

No doubt the price has gone up in 30 years, but when I lived in Manhattan I used to see excellent theater all the time for $4 a ticket, which was the maximum the union allowed.

***

P.S. I think After Eight's first post is not only correct, but his best-argued post since I started reading here.

[wonkit]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 9:49pm

The tax laws may provide an incentive but it isn't the same as a subsidy. And, contrary to what many believe, a vast majority of investors do not invest in order to lose money. The point is to recover your capital to reinvest it, and get some profit besides. And the use of passive capital losses is not restricted to theater investments.

If you want real government subsidies that benefit theater and audience alike, put arts education back into schools.

[Fantod]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 9:56pm

Jane2, I wrote it all myself. Was that a criticism or a compliment?

[n2nbaby]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 10:24pm

I think most people in this thread have made some very good, well rounded points. The thing is, when I read about people complaining about tickets prices, I don't exactly look at it as people thinking they are entitled to something. Sometimes yes but most of the time I just seem them being aggravated that theater is something they adore and they simple just can't afford to see everything they would like to. I would love to see If/Then but unfortunately, it just wasn't in my budget and I'm going to have to miss it. You win some, you lose some.

With that being said, most shows DO offer affordable tickets for people who don't have the money to buy premium or full priced tickets. Thanks to HipTix, rush, lotto, etc. on my last trip my friend and I saw 7 shows for less than $300 a person, something most people who know little about theater are astounded by. I explain how I did it and they think I'm crazy for waiting x amount of hours to get cheap tickets. When I do a day trip from where I live, I usually take an overnight bus and the second I get off the bus, I head straight to whatever rush line I plan on going in and wait for tickets. I then see my two shows throughout the day and take yet another overnight bus home. When I do a trip to NYC as I did over the summer with my best friend, most days I was up at 6AM so I could get ready to wait in line. It's what we do as theater lovers and I am VERY thankful that shows offer these cheap ways to see shows. Would it be nice if tickets were cheaper? Of course. I would adore to be able to take a bus at 6AM instead of 12:35AM and get into the city knowing my tickets are already secure but you work with that you're given and if you want to see something enough, you will do something crazy like I and many of us do or pinch your pennies to buy a full price ticket.

Hope I made a point. :P I'm a bit tired lol

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 10:28pm

ane2, I wrote it all myself. Was that a criticism or a compliment?

Neither, actually. It was an observance and I had hoped you'd comment on it, which you did. Thanks!

[dramamama611]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 11:07pm

Ok...when I ballparked "tens of thousands" of patrons saw a broadway show last week, I underestimated. Those that pointed out tens of thousands isn't a big number compared with the population, let me clarify.

Over 216,000 tickets were sold last week. However, only 260,000 broadway tickets were even available for sale. Lets pretend this is an average week (and we know its not as 1) it the middle of the winter slump and 2) there are lots of empty theaters getting ready to put up a new show).

That would mean that in a year over eleven million tickets will be/have been sold. How many see more than one show year? I have no idea -- but your argument that "people" aren't able to go to the theater is just silly. Are there some people that NEVER go but wish they could? Most of them don't see a b'way show because the entirely (of getting to NY, staying in NY in addition to paying for tickets) a Broadway trip is incredibly expensive. Not just because of the price of tickets alone. You can't do NY in a day trip from Utah, or Texas, or most of the country.

If you want to argue about how many people in just NY city don't go to the theater, you'd need to poll how many even WANT to go. I have a number of family members that live (or have lived) in NY, and its just not their thing. They don't care how much it costs, because they have no interest.

Museums can be free: how many people STILL don't go?

Do I think tickets are crazy expensive? Yes, I do. Are there shows I don't see because it was too expensive or I didn't have the money? Yes. But I don't think anyone is to blame. It is what it is.

I'm a single mother, that pretty much lives paycheck to paycheck. I live 200 miles away. I see a lot of theater in NY. Why? Because I make the effort to do so. I don't take vacations, I don't have a nice car or fancy jewelry. I make choices, I save, and I look for discounts whenever I can. I go to theater because it feeds my soul and I think its important. I scrimp and save to go and to bring my kids.

THAT'S what I'm entitled to: to make the choices I do, to have what I do. Is it harder for others than me? I'm sure it is, but the the result: maybe the one time a year (or every two years) that they get to go would likely be even more satisfying -- because they EARNED it.

Updated On: 2/26/15 at 11:07 PM

[n2nbaby]

Posted: 2/26/15 at 11:11pm

Very well said @dramamama! I agree and am completely in the same boat. I even got a part time job at a movie theater in part because I'm a huge movie buff and free movies and also so I can make trips to the city on a more regular basis (I live about four and a half hours away).