itsjustmejonhotmailcom said: "JBroadway said: "I'm very curious to see if Betrayal ends up recouping. The numbers aren't bad at all, and I would bet they are making more than their weekly nut. But it's unclear whether the margin is enough to recoup with such a short run.
On the surface, it seems like a fairly cheap play to run, butI imagine all 3 of the leads are pulling in a hefty salary,plus lodging, etc. Especially Hiddleston."
They need to do almost double the business they are doing now in order to recoup."
You may very well be right, but I'm curious to know how you arrived at that confident confusion.
JBroadway said: "itsjustmejonhotmailcom said: "JBroadway said: "I'm very curious to see if Betrayal ends up recouping. The numbers aren't bad at all, and I would bet they are making more than their weekly nut. But it's unclear whether the margin is enough to recoup with such a short run.
On the surface, it seems like a fairly cheap play to run, butI imagine all 3 of the leads are pulling in a hefty salary,plus lodging, etc. Especially Hiddleston."
They need to do almost double the business they are doing now in order to recoup."
You may very well be right, but I'm curious to know how you arrived at that confident confusion.
"
That's based on looking at the recoupment chart in the investment docs and then adding about 20 % :)
@BritCrit I agree with everything you say, because it is based on reasonable prognostications, a far cry from what the posts to which I reacted said.
@sweetlips the facts I (numbered and) stated are not opinions: they are demonstrable facts (other than my intelligent assumption that the show's nut is not over $700k, which I stated as "likely," which it is. Had they not been, I would not have labelled them as such. And the denial of those facts is what around here we call fake news. Now about the numbering: I do that for clarity, and if for some reason you equate that with some "cranky old teacher," so be it. I think clarity has its virtues, and all of us cannot be as clear as you without the magic bullets.
@Curtain, I am guessing your "huh" is about the slight imprecision of what you quote, which obviously, in context, is meant to say that the show has returned some capital to investors, and not that it has returned all of it as one might read the literal quote to say. Re Oklahoma, mindful that no show "must" close unless and until it is kicked to the curb by the landlord, or cannot secure sufficient funding to proceed, I think the case for closure of Oklahoma certainly exceeds that for Tootsie, even though I personally would rather see the former stay around.
JBroadway said: "itsjustmejonhotmailcom said: "That's based on looking at the recoupment chart in the investment docs and then adding about 20 % :)"
Are the investment docs made public somehow, or do you have an in with the production?
"
If you have $25 and some time on your hands you can get a copy from the NY Secretary of State. Or if you have friends who regularly invest in theater you can ask them if they have a copy.
WOW I'm so thrilled for Waitress! I went into the show on Saturday expecting Colleen to be great because I know she has training/experience, but I didn't know anything about Todrick. I was so happy with both of their performances!! Honestly, this current cast is so amazing. Alison Luff is totally underappreciated right now, but if you can see her PLEASE go see her. She's an incredible Jenna. Her She Used To Be Mine had me and my friend in tears, and I'm pretty sure I heard sniffling behind me. She brought in new riffs and her chemistry with Mark was amazing. I think someone else on here said they had a more flirty vibe and I totally saw that. They were incredible together, especially in "You matter to me". This cast is amazing. To be honest, after the show ended, I went to the box office and got a ticket for their final performance (September 15th, BroadwayBox code BOX2, $48). That's how good they are. I'm so thrilled!!
RE: Tootsie...I think the only people who can decide on closing is the producers, no? If they recouped it's up to them when they close.
MadsonMelo said: "I used ''must'' because many shows use when they announce closing, never knew it would make such fuzz lol
you guys do love drama tho."
I passed the Hudson yesterday, and I think I did see that they had "MUST CLOSE [x date]" for Sea Wall/A Life, so you're definitely right about that. I think that word is mostly used for limited runs though?
There are many reasons a show "must close." These include (1) that the actors involved have other commitments and recasting makes no sense or would not produce sufficient revenue, (2) that the production does not have enough money to continue and either cannot or is not inclined to seek further funding, (3) the landlord has threatened to invoke the stop clause. Notably, none of these conditions obtain for Tootsie at this time. I understand the parallel to the language used in marketing when shows DO have a reason they must close, but it simply makes no sense to use it for Tootsie. However marginally, I think most understand that the show is not in the red. Let's assume it is "only" netting $25,000 a week. If someone offered you a way to receive $25,000 a week, or $25 a week, would you "no, you 'must' stop"?
I loved Tootsie. I’m not in a race to see it again, but I do think it’s the second strongest new musical of the season. That being said, they should find a celebrity or YouTuber or SOMEONE to play one of the supporting roles for a month or two over the fall/winter, and I think it would really help.
Look at Waitress - looks like we’re learning YouTubers are a solid investment, given how they can film videos during the day and perform at night. Their popularity is through the roof and can bring in a whole new audience base that would never go to see Tootsie, for example.
itsjustmejonhotmailcom said: "Jarethan said: "Are you thinking in the neighborhood of 0.5%?"
I'd guess between .5% and 1.5% returned most weeks."
percentage of what? investment?
understand that there is no correlation between weekly net proceeds and the payout to investors. Investors do not receive a weekly check the way royalty recipients do.
VotePeron said: "I loved Tootsie. I’m not in a race to see it again, but I do think it’s the second strongest new musical of the season. That being said, they should find a celebrity or YouTuber or SOMEONE to play one of the supporting roles for a month or two over the fall/winter, and I think it would really help.
Look at Waitress - looks like we’re learning YouTubers are a solid investment, given how they can film videos during the day and perform at night. Their popularity is through the roof and can bring in a whole new audience base that would never go to see Tootsie, for example."
I think you are right. Another good one for Broadway would be Gabbie Hanna -- she can sing and she is secretly a broadway fangirl. I had a few TikTokers to see Beetlejuice on Sunday as they were in town for the VMAs. TikTok is a great app for broadway, even though none of shows are using it yet. I learned about Six through this app.
I like the idea of Tootsie moving to a smaller theater. I don't know about the logistics of doing so but if the show is at 70% capacity at the Marquis, then that could potentially be a full house or closer to it somewhere else.
I also had no idea who Colleen was until I read it here. But nice to see Waitress get such a huge boost. It was just announced over the weekend that Todrick wrote the music for a new parade at Disneyland launching in the Spring. Maybe that will also draw some interest for people to see him in Waitress.
School has already started in certain parts of the country so I think the Fall effect may already be starting for some shows.
RW, why does it matter to you if a show is playing to a full house or 70%? I don't get it.
And understand that a move of that sort is not like switching hotel rooms; it'll cost over a million dollars. You gonna pay that for a show that's marginal to begin with?
HogansHero said: "RW, why does it matter to you if a show is playing to a full house or 70%? I don't get it.
And understand that a move of that sort is not like switching hotel rooms; it'llcost over a million dollars. You gonna paythat for a show that's marginalto begin with?"
Yeah, I was going to say that it’s playing to about 70% full houses, but making less than 50% of its gross potential. Even if it moved to a smaller house, the capacity percentage would maybe change but the second figure would likely not change much. If anything, both figures would likely suffer due to the downtime between closing at one theater and opening at another. A certain inertia would likely set in. Not to mention reconfiguring/rebuilding sets to fit a different theater/stage.
joined:4/6/12
joined:
4/6/12
Posted: 8/26/19 at 7:23pm