Well, I just went to order some tickets for Wicked in Boston in October. When a ticket for a TOUR cost $200-300 you know somehting's wrong. Since when does seeing a touring show cost more than seeing the show on Broadway? This is outrageous; hopefully Sweeney tickets won't be this bad.
Why should a tour cost any less than a Broadway production?
Broadway Legend Joined: 8/15/05
because that's just the way it usually is.
Yeah, they usually cost less. Balcony Row T cost $121.00.
Because tours aren't the same as the b'way versions. They're close, but not the same. They inevitably have less/smaller sets, smaller ensembles, smaller orchestra's, less lighting effects, etc.
Broadway Legend Joined: 10/13/05
Delted because apparently I'll hurt myself if I say the wrong thing.
Broadway Star Joined: 8/12/06
$200 for a tour? That's definitely pricey.
Tours have always been cheaper than Broadway, but if you look at the costs incurred in moving the show from city to city, lodging costs, costs of gas, etc, I'm actually surprised tour tickets are as low as they are.
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/21/05
"Tours are traditionally cheaper than Broadway shows because you are seeing less than Broadway (supposedly)."
That is ridiculous and untrue. You people need to sit down before you hurt yourselves. The cost of a ticket to see a tour is based on the market rate for the city it is in. New York, which is the most expensive city in the country, has a market rate of $110-15. Tickets for the same show in a city like Chicago have a market rate of $85 (though they are rapidly reaching New York rates in that city). It's even less in smaller markets. So please don't spout nonsense about tours being less in quality than the Broadway production as a reason for prices.
BroadwayEnthusiast, where are you buying your tickets? If you get them from Ticketmaster or the box office, the highest price is $130 for pit. Are you buying premium or something? Most orchestra seats are $85, which is still expensive for a tour, but better than 200.
Videos