Broadway Investing- Page 2

[Daddy Warbucks]

Posted: 7/26/14 at 11:09pm

@HH, wise words. Thanks so much for the suggestions.

[ggersten]

Posted: 7/28/14 at 4:41pm

The NYT weighs in...
Changes coming to investment strategies?

[HorseTears]

Posted: 7/28/14 at 5:21pm

I'm thinking of taking my Arabian horses on holiday in Saint Tropez. Do you think I should use platinum or white gold for their stable doors on the yacht?








I kid, I kid. Just filling out my unemployment benefits form here. This thread has actually been really interesting for a complete outsider.

[ARTc3]

Posted: 7/28/14 at 5:55pm

I think certain members on this board are extremely unkind to Ken Davenport. Mr. Davenport is an extremely amicable producer who works very hard to demystify the processes of mounting a production. His blog is an excellent read and his success rate is actually rather high - both on and off Broadway.

Some people didn't like his method for raising the capital for Godspell. Why? What he did was an experiment and it worked. He was able to bring many people who otherwise couldn't afford investing along for quite a ride. No, it didn't pay off financially, but he did his best and I for one thought the Godspell he helped mount a very exciting production.

As for the "inside" knowledge that was alluded to in a previous post, Mr. Davenport is currently involved with such hits as Kinky Boots, which is a Daryl Roth production. Currently, there are few producers more "inside" than Ms. Roth and she seems to have no issue associating with Mr. Davenport.

[Daddy Warbucks]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 1:36am

@ARTc3 - you seem to have strong positive feelings about Ken; what has been your interaction with him? Did you take his seminar? Invest in any of his musicals? He seems to have been successful in making a name for himself.

[ARTc3]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 10:47am

Daddy Warbucks, very good question... I have only a very limited association with Mr. Davenport, but it has been an extremely positive one. I guess it started with me signing up to read his blog(s). I found his daily writings rather good reading for those interested in the theater. I even tried to win one or two of his weekly contests, but so far to no avail. So, I guess it started by just following his blog. In his blog, he has put himself "out there" more than any other producer I am aware of. He just seemed like a "regular" guy, so when he repeated invited his readers to approach him if our paths crossed, I did. I have actually had quite a few personal conversations with Mr. Davenport and he remains, in my opinion, a "regular" guy.

Around the time of Godspell, he planned a flash mob and as I have always wanted to participate in one, I did so. It was a great experience and memory I will always cherish - and on a few occasions I have had the opportunity to tell him so.

Lastly, when the box office opened to Kinky Boots, I found myself locked out of great seats because of premium pricing. I was willing to pay full price for excellent seats, but no more. I was angry that a show that had yet to open wasn't making at least some of its best seats available for purchase and wrote Ken an email expressing my disapproval. Not only did he respond, but rectified the situation by arranging for me to have excellent seats at the regular full price and not the marked up premium.

I have not loved every production Mr. Davenport has mounted. I thought 13 was lackluster and rather inadequate for the Broadway market. I think most of his productions have been excellent though and I commend him for the niche he's marked out for himself within the larger Broadway producing community. He really seems to want to make a difference and I for one have no reason to doubt his intentions.

Mr. Davenport, if you're reading this, I'm a fan.

Updated On: 7/29/14 at 10:47 AM

[beltingbaritone]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 2:49pm

^ARTc3, he just may well be!


LINK

[ARTc3]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 4:50pm

He may. And, if he does, I'm glad that someone on here is defending him and his effort to de-mystify producing. And, he has always been kind to me…

[dtzumbrunnen]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 6:28pm

Agreed, ARTc3. I actually wish that I had been more aware of what was going on with People of Godspell when it was happening, because I would have considered it, even knowing what the return looks like now.

I've had the chance to hear Ken speak a few times, most recently at a large conference for the adult learning industry where he spoke. He's always come across as a regular guy, as you describe, with a passion for making theater happen. Whether every tactic works or not, I appreciate that he's willing to challenge old ways of thinking about mounting a production.

What he chooses to produce may not be for everyone, but I've enjoyed more Davenport Theatrical productions than I've disliked. The fact that he continually pushes to get new work on stage is a good thing - unfortunately it's not always financially rewarding. For every Kinky Boots you get a Bridges of Madison County. In the end, I'm glad we got both of those...so I'd say keep it up Ken!

[LightsOut90]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 6:57pm

@ARTc3 yep Davenport certainly did take people for a ride. He is an absolute slime bag, and couldnt produce a hit on his own if it struck him in the face.

[Daddy Warbucks]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 7:27pm

Lightsout, did you or someone you know invest in Godspell? I worry that Ken may have made enemies via his approach to allow non-accredited investors into the high risk game of Broadway investing. Perhaps accredited investors are less likely to take personal offense when they lose their play money to Ken? I don't know Ken, but I haven't heard any good reasons to avoid him, as he seems to be doing what every producer does, try to get folks to invest money into a show that has at least an 80% chance of being a flop.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 7:36pm

I already had my reservations about him for a variety of reasons, many of them admittedly selfish, but when people in his own office have been telling me of late (in the words of a character in Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story) that "you don't want no part of this ****" whenever I inquire about his projects, that doesn't really bode well...

Updated On: 7/29/14 at 07:36 PM

[HBP]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 7:37pm

Has anyone seen this? It showed up on my Facebook today...

http://www.standingroomcap.com/

Seems like Kickstarter for Broadway.. or a glorified version of what they did with Godspell. How does everyone feel about crowd investing shows?

[LightsOut90]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 7:47pm

^ January 2015 is when the new legislation kicks in that pretty much anyone can invest in any show with out the accreditation requirements.

[ARTc3]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 8:01pm

LightsOut90, No Producer produces anything on their own. Theater is a collaborative business. Having typed that, Mr. Davenport has a very respectable track record. I don't know where you're getting your numbers, or why you believe he hasn't produced several economic successes, because he has.

As I was asked about my associations with him (limited), I'm curious as to yours. Why the vitriol? I'd like to ask the same question to g.d.e.l.g.i. What's your beef?

[theatreguy]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 8:08pm

I just got an email inviting me to invest in On the Town. I have no idea how they found me - I don't make nearly enough money to be investing in anything - but it made me think of this thread. Here's the website:

http://www.invest.maxolev.com/

[LightsOut90]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 9:00pm

lets see

Macbeth - Didnt recoup
Godspell - Didnt Recoup
Miss Abaigail - didnt recoup
13 - flopped
oleanna - flopped
Alter Boyz & 80s prom are his only 2 certifiable hits that he produced on his own
every other show he has been involved with was in a financial capacity

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 9:29pm

^ Or as a general manager, which isn't quite the same as holding down the fort.

[LightsOut90]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 9:44pm

exactly, the only way he can produce a hit is by loading it with 7 name actors and considering there split it will barely turn a profit.

[ggersten]

Posted: 7/29/14 at 11:21pm

I looked through the Maxolev site. It left me with the question about post-Broadway life for these LLC investors. I've read that several shows don't recoup until the tour and or the licensed productions. While I realize that every show's funding is different - and the contracts may be different - but is it common that the funders of the Broadway show do not see money from tours and licensing. And yes I realize that there are different kinds of tours - some are just licensed touring productions and some may be "official" but funded with a new LLC.

[Daddy Warbucks]

Posted: 7/31/14 at 5:55pm

@ggersten - Some of these other folks here might have more experience with this and give you a better answer, but as I understand it, whether you get any benefit from the tours, cast recording, etc., depends on the show and the producer. Something I've heard about several times is a scenario where the investors on the Broadway run of a show get the first shot at invest in the tour (up to 50% of what they invested in the Broadway run). For instance, in one case, if you invested $25,000 into a certain show's broadway run, you would have had the automatic right (if you wanted) to invest $12,500 into the U.S. national tour.

[ScottK]

Posted: 7/31/14 at 6:10pm

Investing in the Broadway production usually DOES get you monies from tours, CDs, regionals, etc etc. It is a long way to trickle down, but all the subsidiary assets USUALLY need to pay a percentage back to the original Broadway mothership. (exceptions are mostly transfers from London, and revivals).

As for tour participation, if the tours are set up as separate corporations, investors in the mothership production USUALLY get to invest in the tours. The percentage is based on the capitalization of the tour, and your orginal percentage ownership of the mothership.

So to use the DW example, if an investor originally put in $25k and the show cost 10 mil, if the tour was capitalized at 5 mil, then his tour investment would be $12.5 k
If the tour was cap'd at 8 mil, then the investment would be $20k.

HOWEVER--those rules usually apply for the FIRST national tour. Participation in 2nd national tours would likely be reduced proportionally across all investors.

[Daddy Warbucks]

Posted: 8/1/14 at 1:27pm

I imagine it is different for each show, but generally speaking, after you have invested into a show, imagining a show that is on its way to recoup:

(a) how soon do you see the first check after opening night?

(b) how frequently do the checks come in? Weekly? Monthly? Quarterly?

[RaisedOnMusicals]

Posted: 8/1/14 at 1:40pm

"I imagine it is different for each show."

I think you answered your own question.

Buy the way, a better mindset going might be: "I wonder if I'll get any of my money back." If you are not prepared psychologically to lose 100% of your investment, don't invest.

Having said that, the closer a show is to achieving 100% of gross weekly potential each week, the faster the show will recoup and the faster you'll start getting some return. And that's how papers read: It will take X weeks to recoup at varying percentages of groww weekly potential. Maybe, for example, 20 weeks at 100%, 35 weeks at 70%, etc. But everything varies show to show.

[Daddy Warbucks]

Posted: 8/1/14 at 2:16pm

Thanks RaisedOnMusicals. Note, that I'm not inquiring how long it will take to recoup (I realize that is all over the map, depending on the musical, and at least 4 in 5 shows WON'T recoup).

But my question is, under the hypothetical of the 1 in 5 show that DOES recoup, generally/broadly speaking, I'm curious to hear what peoples' experience is in how soon the first check comes after opening night (e.g., not for 9 months despite a successful run), and how frequently checks come after that (e.g., once every couple of months). Would love to hear real life experiences, and I realize there is no hard and fast rule.

Updated On: 8/1/14 at 02:16 PM