The "off-broadway model"

[raddersons]

Posted: 12/19/18 at 9:54am

Through reading lots of articles and Wikipedia entries on theater, quite a few seem to mention that there was an off-broadway "depression" in the early 2000s. Shows closed like crazy, including the long-running Fantasticks. Not to mention The Little Shubert (Now Stage 42) opened in 2002 (?) and intentionally had 499 seats so it could be considered a large(ish?) theater but still be considered an off-broadway house, allowing for lower running costs. Still to this day, it rarely has any shows and largely sits vacant. seemingly because the off-Broadway model collapsed. What exactly was the off-broadway business model, and why did it fall apart in the early 2000s? What's changed? Unions? Ticket prices? Were people using all of their theater money for a single ticket to The Producers? Tourists afraid of New York post-9/11? Gimme your thoughts, BWW.

[haterobics]

Posted: 12/19/18 at 10:49am

Probably 9/11.

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/19/18 at 12:26pm

I had a really long response to this! It would be a great face to face conversation to have as I feel there are a lot of things involved. Especially financially.

I have found myself going to more off-off Broadway shows this past year or so. There was a certain feel, if that makes sense, to seeing an off Broadway show. A lot of it feels more commercial now. And more expensive. I have found myself deciding between an off-Broadway and Broadway show based on price. Discounts do help a lot when they are available.

For me, off-off Broadway has become my off-Broadway. And I have seen some really wonderful things.

Just my random thoughts. Hoping this turns into an interesting thread.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 12/19/18 at 10:59pm

First, you have to recognize that not-for-profit off-Broadway productions are a completely different situation than commercial off-Broadway productions. NFP productions continually will be produced as long as the theatre companies exist. Commercial productions declined in quantity because the risk became too great for investors.

The first problem is geography. Immediately after 9/11, many tourists were scared to come to New York. Those that did mainly stayed in tourist areas. If a theatre was difficult to get to, or confusing to get to, they wouldn't get the sale. This isn't as much a problem anymore, but it remains one of the reasons why they don't get the tourist dollar.

Second problem is the term "off-Broadway." To a tourist, it has an association with perhaps being "not good enough for Broadway." Or, not as professionally produced as a Broadway show.

Third, the costs. Most off-Broadway theatres have less than 400 seats. It's difficult to fill them when you have to charge high prices just to pay the bills. If you're in a house that has union attachments, such as the Little Shubert, then forget about profits. I can't think of a single show that played that venue which recouped.

You CAN have a successful off-Broadway commercial production...it does happen. But it is very rare. There is no longer a "model" that works. It's actually more risky than a Broadway show, IMO. The new "model" seems to be to structure the financials of a limited engagement in hopes you get a tiny profit with a hit show during a limited run.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 12/19/18 at 11:03pm

#1 on the list of culprits is real estate. the cost and the value, which caused a loss of spaces. Then there is the economics of producing on a smaller scale. Third is that nfp off-B has blossomed and Broadway has continued to be the destination of choice for off-B successes.  there is more but that's a good start.

Oh and the little shubert/stage 42 is sui generis. It is the only off-b space shacked with a preposteous iatse contract.