UPDATE: IN TRANSIT Sets April 16 Closing Date — Page 4

"It is not vanity; it is inexperienced producers who don't want to let go of their dream. We've seen this all too often of late."



I consider those two things one and the same.

I really thought they were going to announce closing yesterday for the two week window for a New Year's closing. Guess they have more money to burn than I thought.

Clyde15 said: "An ad for In Transit popped up on the Chat Board for me today. I thought the ad was odd for a number of reasons. But one think was that they didn't bill it as an acapella musical?"



Their new ads feature the tagline, "Broadway's New Musical Comedy" and just like you said, it doesn't say ANYTHING about the fact that the show is completely acapella! So weird!

shouldn't we be getting some kind of notice today?

My friend in the cast says the producers are hoping to keep the show running through February. By then the show may find its audience. That said, they can see the empty seats they are playing to.

The "producers" (none of whom have ever produced a show before) have some of the deepest pockets in America. They can afford to keep throwing cash down the well if they want to.

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Colin-Hanlon-Will-Join-IN-TRANSIT-Telly-Leung-Departs-for-Personal-Obligation-20170103

They already have cast changes? Tch tch. Hope Telly's doing okay.

Well they bothered with getting in a new contract and everything, doesn't look like the producers want to close out the show anytime soon.

Updated On: 1/3/17 at 10:19 AM

No one here wants a good show to close. They want a better show which is (1) more worthy of broadway (2) doesn't constantly lose money because that's what keeps the new producers away from giving away to art ventures and gives overall bad name to theater. The speculation is around when (and if) the show will close because it's performing poorly and, in this case, not an objectively good show to begin with. This same group was incredibly sad when Fun Home closed, and will be when other actually good shows close.

No one here is willing the cast and crew into unemployment, not even in theory. You're falsifying the narrative. I know I am not willing unemployment on people, but if you're going to use that (false) line of argument, you're in theory willing unemployment to folks who'd replace this show.

Editing/responding to ClumsyDude15's (now deleted) post: I will never understand the fascination with wanting to censor a conversation or consistently saying a particular conversation is in poor taste. People will discuss all aspects of the business, including closing dates, and no amount of prudery or holier-than-thou judgment can stop that. I just find this type of censure in such poor taste as people are perfectly justified in discussing whatever they like and so you're in theory willing them into only discussing topics you like.

Updated On: 1/4/17 at 11:32 AM

I'm taking bets on whether In Transit is a Producers-style money laundering scheme

"Why do you care? It's not your money. If they want to throw money at their show to keep it running as long as possible, why does it matter to you?"

Or: Why do you care? If people want to discuss a show's potential closing date and lack of commercial viability, why does it matter to you? Do you somehow benefit from an antipathy to this kind of discussion?

Updated On: 1/3/17 at 03:48 PM

newintown said: ""Why do you care? It's not your money. If they want to throw money at their show to keep it running as long as possible, why does it matter to you?"

Or: Why do you care? If people want to discuss a show's potential closing date and lack of commercial viability, why does it matter to you? Do you somehow benefit from an antipathy to this kind of discussion?"

I have no issues with people speculating about a closing date nor the perceived lack of commercial viability of a show. However, the tone of quite a few opinions on the matter come across as if they are offended that the producers would dare to try and keep their show running. Ironic, since these are the same people who bemoan others for being glad when a show closes and puts people out of work.

And full disclosure, I benefit greatly when a show stays open; regardless of its profitability.

@Fosse, As others have noted, this is a reasonable subject to discuss. It's all well and good that people have money to burn (there is no such thing as a tax write-off that makes economic sense in this context) but I do not think that this trend we are seeing toward Don Quixote productions is good for the theatre. Broadway is complex analytically because at once it is a business, an artform and a sporting event. To try to make it less than all of those, as you seem to want to do, is to deny its essence.

whether the show is good or bad is irrelevant. Objectively, it did not find an audience and that's what this thread is about. However much someone loves a show, and thinks it should be exposed on Broadway, once it fails, keeping it open is just foolish.