Do you have a personal axe to grind with Ken Davenport, or something? I don't think I've ever seen someone go out of their way to bash a producer, as much as you do with Ken. And I've seen a lot.
Sorry, what? How have I "gone out of my way" to bash him? I didn't even participate in the thread that was literally just people bashing him. If I recall correctly, I've only ever called another user "Ken" once when he/she went out of his/her way to start a brand-new thread to praise this show.
I truly have no Davenport ax to grind. I just think this is a really strange, hokey move that's going to leave a town disappointed when this show flops and loses money.
BroadwayConcierge said: "Sorry, what? How have I "gone out of my way"to bash him? I didn't even participate in the thread that was literally just people bashing him. If I recall correctly, I've only ever called another user "Ken" once when he/she went out of his/her way to start a brand-new thread to praise this show.
I truly have no Davenport ax to grind. I just think this is a really strange, hokey move that's going to leave a town disappointed when this show flops and loses money."
There's no information in this article about the town financially supporting the show. It seems to be more symbolic and an opportunity for publicity.
It's just another publicity stunt by P.T. Davenport, who is desperate for any press he can generate. The town isn't investing anything, so they won't lose anything --- just like they wouldn't earn anything if the show turned into the next Hamilton.
Some of the people on this board just make me laugh. They'll piss and moan endlessly about a show that hasn't done enough to get publicity, not enough ads, no creative efforts to make it stand out and get people talking about it and when a producer does that, it's hokey and they're desperate. Yeah, OK, whatever.
I think this is kind of a brilliant move. At first, I thought the town passed some sort of referendum to fund the show in some way, but from the posts here, this seems to be more of a symbolic move. I don't really see a downside to this. If anything, it really brings heart to the show.
In our millions, in our billions, we are most powerful when we stand together. TW4C unwaveringly joins the worldwide masses, for we know our liberation is inseparably bound.
Signed,
Theater Workers for a Ceasefire
https://theaterworkersforaceasefire.com/statement
Did you read the article, or the thread? Its symbolic. (And a publicity stunt)
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
Did you read the article, or the thread? Its symbolic. (And a publicity stunt)
If we're not having fun, then why are we doing it?
These are DISCUSSION boards, not mutual admiration boards. Discussion only occurs when we are willing to hear what others are thinking, regardless of whether it is alignment to our own thoughts.
Call_me_jorge said: "What a waste of tax payer money."
No taxpayer money is being used. That’s clearly stated in the...never mind. Why would I ever expect people to read the article before commenting on it? Foolish me.
UncleCharlie said: "Some of the people on this board just make me laugh. They'll piss and moan endlessly about a show that hasn't done enough to get publicity, not enough ads, nocreative efforts to make it stand out and get people talking about itand when a producer does that, it's hokey and they'redesperate. Yeah, OK, whatever."
My sense is that most of the pissing and moaning is in relation to EFFECTIVELY marketing a show. If, for example, a producer spends on ads that are ineffectual, no one is applauding that, and that (rightly) gets criticized. Let's revisit this particular gimmick when we have data to decide if it is effective or not. It's fine to pretend to be Merrick, but don't lose sight of the fact that Merrick's mishagas was legendarily effective.
HogansHero said: "My sense is that most of the pissing and moaning is in relation to EFFECTIVELY marketing a show. If, for example, a producer spends on ads thatare ineffectual, no one is applauding that, and that (rightly) gets criticized. Let's revisit this particular gimmick when we have data to decide if it is effective or not. It's fine to pretend to be Merrick, but don't lose sight of the fact that Merrick's mishagas was legendarily effective."
I'm not sure this is going to make a noticeable difference in ticket sales other than perhaps for those living in or close to that town. But it seems zero risk and quite likely zero or close to zero cost and at least he's trying to think outside the box a bit and explore every avenue to get the word out. I'm not going to credit him if it doesn't work but I see no need to belittle his effort as some have done in this thread either. The whole thread was started in the first place by one of our more upstanding citizens seemingly just to mock him.
adamgreer said: "No taxpayer money is being used. That’s clearlystated in the...never mind. Why would I ever expect people to read the article before commenting on it? Foolish me."
Actually, the article does NOT clearly say that no taxpayer money is being used. It simply doesn't say that it is. While there is nothing in the article to indicate that the city itself is investing, perhaps I'm suspicious, but I also see a way of getting local investors' money into the show. There just have been so many schemes.
@UncleCharlie I understand what you are saying but mocking, belittling and criticizing the marketing of shows is a part of the standard traffic here. We have been told here, for example, that Hamilton's logo (when first displayed on the marquee) was terrible and would not help sell the show, that Hello Dolly's ad and FOH designs did not convey anything about it (as needed to sell tickets) and that the choice of what aspects of the show to reveal in marketing was disastrous, and (for good measure) Carousel's everything. So yes, people have a lot to say about the marketing of this show. Because they can.
@MarkBearSF I'd be surprised because I would think it would violate NJ law. Also, worth remembering that the "article" is actually just a press release.