NYT article:Harry Potter 68+mil to produce!

[dramamama611]

Wow.

 

(Sorry if this is already posted elsewhere.)

[BroadwayConcierge]

WOW! Setting the $33M theatre renovation cost aside, $35.5M for a production capitalization alone is jaw-dropping. It's paying off, though—the show is terrific.

[JBroadway]

Wait I'm sorry I'm confused. Can someone explain this to me?

(1) What's the different between the capitalization and the actual production cost, and why is the former excluded from the latter, as opposed to being lumped together for the overall cost to produce?

(2) I could have sworn Spider-Man cost $65 Million (hence the "wink-wink" lyric in the Green Goblin's song), so wouldn't that make Harry Potter the most expensive show EVER, non-musical or no?

And if so, (3) how could Harry Potter beat out Spider-Man's cost, when the Spider-Man sets, costumes, lighting, and flying effects were far more elaborate?

[rosscoe(au)]

Insane that nearly every performance is sold out till next March. 

[sorano916]

JBroadway said: "Wait I'm sorry I'm confused. Can someone explain this to me?

(1) What's the different between the capitalization and the actual production cost, and why is the former excluded from the latter, as opposed to being lumped together for the overall cost to produce?

(2) I could have sworn Spider-Man cost $65 Million (hence the "wink-wink" lyric in the Green Goblin's song), so wouldn't that make Harry Potter the most expensive show EVER, non-musical or no?

And if so, (3) how could Harry Potter beat out Spider-Man's cost, when the Spider-Man sets, costumes, lighting, and flying effects were far more elaborate?"

Capitalization is the amount the producers and investors have put into the show. The article broke the $35.5 million to include "$11.7 million for the physical production, $7.8 million for “general and administrative” costs, including the design and signage of the facade, $3.4 million for advertising and publicity and $3.2 million for salaries."

Of the $65 million, $33 million was to "clear out and redo the theatre" which, as pointed out in the article, broke down to $23 million to get 'Paramour' out and then $10 million for the actual renovation.

In the NYT article, it says that Spider-Man cost $75 million. 

[BJR]

$23 million to get PARAMOUR out. Wow. The most expensive part of the show was kicking them out. And the costs to kick them out was as much as a huge musical itself, though perhaps not a corporate-backed one. That's incredible.

[Call_me_jorge]

I wonder how long the show has to run with it’s current grosses to recoup

[HogansHero]

Call_me_jorge said: "I wonder how long the show has to run with it’s current grosses to recoup"

We don't seem to know what the nut is, but if we assume (lowball) they net $500k a week, that's 67 weeks. If we assume $750k, that would be about 45 weeks. I'd be inclined to say a year. 

 

[BJR]

And what's wild is that seems quite likely to happen. Even if there are unexpected hiccups along the way, I can't imagine this doesn't keep attracting top ticket prices for a couple years at least.

[BroadwayNYC2]

I will say, sure the show is a corporate behemoth, but their average ticket price is still reasonable--only the 6th most expensive and within $10-$20 of Come From Away and Wicked. 

[Wick3]

I agree that they have made Harry Potter affordable for the most part. Having seen the view of the balcony, dress circle, and orchestra, even the balcony view there at the Lyric is so much better than the balcony view of other Bway theaters (i.e. St James, Walter Kerr, etc.). 

It's also a show a lot of Harry Potter fans would be willing to see again and again. I know I have plans on seeing it again in June after seeing it back on its first preview. 

[PThespian]

Oh believe me.....we already have a lot of repeat attendees.