Live data from Hacker News

The Economics of Broadway Shows

thehustle.co

31–40 of 46 posts

Re: The Economics of Broadway Shows

#31
post #7

As someone who moonlights in the theatre industry (as a theatre photographer), I'm vaguely familiar with the economics of putting on shows - the article is very interesting and tallies with my experience. However, I do question one line in the article: > The average income of Broadwaygoers in 2018-19 was $261k — roughly 4x the median household income in the US. $261k?!? the average income of attendees?!? That's can't…

As others have said, median is more interesting, but also remember that there's a selection bias: these are people traveling to or living in one of the country's most expensive cities.

Re: The Economics of Broadway Shows

#32

Not knowing what makes a hit vs a flop seems... strange. Familiar actors and stories might help, but also things that are clever and artistically memorable (e.g. Hamilton) have got to help. I'd also be interested to know how many shows start off-Broadway or off-off-Broadway (100-500 seats and below 100 seats as per this article), and move up to the bigger theatres: test a show in a smaller venue, see if people/critic…

I invested (way, way, way below the line) in a show which opened off–Broadway a few weeks ago. Had rave reviews when it ran outside NYC and was supposed to open in April 2020. For some odd reason they had to delay the opening to November 2021. It opened, the audience seemed to love it, but one review in the home town paper of record tanked it, I expect it to close this week or next.

Off-off Broadway to Off–Broadway is doable, but the economics of adding that extra seat (499 to 500) and becoming a “Broadway” show are just unrealistic for a lot of shows. Different union requirements, plus the theatres impose different costs, and you have to raise a lot more money to open a Broadway show, regardless of where it’s coming from (out of town, off/off-off, local workshop, etc).

The only "off off" Broadway show I can think of that made it on Broadway in recent times was Hedwig (started in the Jane hotel bar IIRC), and that took a detour through being turned into a movie.

If anything, investing in startups feels easier, I could have spread the same amount of money across multiple startups, figure on losing 33-50%, breaking even a bit, and having one or two return everything. In contrast in a musical or play you’re gambling that the combination of director, cast, band, theatre, mood of the reviewers, mood of the audience will combine just the right way.

Re: The Economics of Broadway Shows

#33
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main sign it was going to be a success was a performance Lin-Manuel Miranda did at the White House. Listen for where the laughs are; they're not there when you see it on Broadway (and I assume The Public Theater). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNFf7nMIGnE That's important because the premise is high school cringy. Let's take a historical story and set it to rap! If it wasn't so well-executed, it would have come…

I would say the general perception is that it was extremely cringey. Obviously they found a large enough audience that disagreed but I don't think they were a majority. Obviously anecdotal.

Are you sure the target audience doesn't also find it cringey now? I noticed Hamilton seemed to drop out of the zeitgeist almost overnight at some point. It wasn't as precipitous as Game of Thrones's fall, perhaps, but it was fast. Can you imagine the Obamas saying Hamilton is the “best piece of art in any form that I have ever seen in my life” (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/theater/hamilton-takes-a-...) today? Seems unlikely.

Re: The Economics of Broadway Shows

#34
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main sign it was going to be a success was a performance Lin-Manuel Miranda did at the White House. Listen for where the laughs are; they're not there when you see it on Broadway (and I assume The Public Theater). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNFf7nMIGnE That's important because the premise is high school cringy. Let's take a historical story and set it to rap! If it wasn't so well-executed, it would have come…

I would say the general perception is that it was extremely cringey. Obviously they found a large enough audience that disagreed but I don't think they were a majority. Obviously anecdotal.

>>General perception of extremely cringey

I’ll offer a counterpoint. I’ve seen it once live and soon going to see it twice next time it comes to town in a few months. I can’t wait, I’m giddy. A whole lot of people out there clearly are too.

I totally get that some people literally can’t understand rap music words. If you are hard of hearing and aren’t familiar with the story, you are totally lost in the audience (ESPECIALLY as the actors change characters after intermission)

In my experience there’s a group of annoying “New Yorkers” (aka people who identify as New Yorkers, as in they lived there during an internship in college or spent a couple years “working in finance” finding themselves before moving back to Tupelo) who love to shit on anyone who recently saw Hamilton; they roll their eyes and say “oh yes yes I saw the original cast back in 2015, it was cute…” Calling Hamilton extremely cringey sounds like signaling or sneetching vs. an honest critique of the show. It’s a thing I’ve noticed repeatedly and this comment fits that bill, and I don’t know why it bothers me more than simply saying “I didn’t care for it” but it does.

Hamilton is a phenomenal work of art, the White House performance is a peek at creative genius in process, my kids have probably watched the Disney+ production 100 times and know all the words to (almost ;) ) every song and therefore know more about that specific era of American history than I did until I was much older.

Back to the TFA, I think it was such a runaway success compared to other shows because it feels like an intensely personal work of art and not just “let’s copy paste and bang out another ALW formula show.” There’s no shortage of misguided efforts at for-profit art, and people scratch their heads wondering why their absurdist introspection of (fill in the blank) or the kinkade-y reboot of some hit in another format didn’t rake in a billion dollars. The soundtrack is light years more listenable than most other musicals; that’s very subjective but I think it’s a significant part. I appreciate the overarching message of Hamilton, power of the pen, the hope for the future, the need to take smart action, the ability to recover from mistakes, and the inability to recover from letting pride override rational decision making. There’s just so much there.

One more thought on the overall economics of a show not discussed in the article: since shows are largely seen by tourists, as a tourist, there’s more to the cost of the show than the ticket itself. The opportunity cost is the most expensive part, and only devoted fans of theater are going to see more than 1-2 shows on a tourist visit to NYC. If I’m going to see a show, it better be good, and I have little interest in risking a precious afternoon in NYC on a swing-and-a-miss. As such, it makes me wonder if a second line touring circuit is possible for very small shows to get exposure in other smaller cities (any other city besides NYC). It would almost have to be a very intensive 4-5 performances a day for 3-5 days in a city, with a brief but panoramic advert blitz at the local level. The equivalent of a small up and coming music group refining their grind and performance at college bars across the country before hitting it big. Digital projection of sets, keeping a deep bench of local stand ins available as needed, relatively standardized audio production requirements, A reciprocal agreement amongst a network of theaters, with a special deal with a nearby hotel in each market could take a lot of the load and cost off. Maybe it already exists.

(some revisions/edits throughout)

Re: The Economics of Broadway Shows

#35

Most U.S. live theater survives only through philanthropy. Broadway’s investor-driven model is a remarkable outlier.

This. As someone who helped to run a theatre company in the USA, it is incredibly hard to do it as a for-profit except at the very high-end, e.g. Broadway.

My First Wife was an actor by career and most for-profit productions survive because they pay their actors so little. And you're only paid for performances, so those many weeks of rehearsals where you are perhaps driving 10 miles each way are going to eat up most of your income from the production.

Re: The Economics of Broadway Shows

#36

Most U.S. live theater survives only through philanthropy. Broadway’s investor-driven model is a remarkable outlier.

You have to remember that musical theater is more pop-driven than operas, orchestras, and plays.

Poster didn't mention musical theatre, but that is a much easier sell to the public, IMO, than straight plays. You don't see many indie musicals produced though compared to say the number of Shakespeare productions that are probably going on in any city right now.

Re: The Economics of Broadway Shows

#37
post #17
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hamilton was workshopped for a very long time and then had a long Off Broadway run at The Public Theatre where additional changes were made. A huge amount of money went into it because of the trust that Lin Manuel had generated with previous work. Spiderman was in tech for over a year (beta testing) because the damned flying didn't work. Then they radically changed the script because it hadn't been workshopped, and i…

People talk about network effects and how beneficial it is to be in Silicon Valley if you're a startup--the same thing has got to be true about New York for on-stage performance. The last time I was there, I picked some random off-off-Broadway thing to go see for twenty bucks, in what was basically a hotel bar, and the quality of the acting was incredible.

Totally. Sets and props and costumes don't necessarily add anything. Go to a theatre festival like the Edinburgh Festival and you can see dozens of amazing productions with amazing talent acting out of a broom closet, wearing the clothes they fell out of bed in that morning.

Re: The Economics of Broadway Shows

#38
post #33
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say the general perception is that it was extremely cringey. Obviously they found a large enough audience that disagreed but I don't think they were a majority. Obviously anecdotal.

Are you sure the target audience doesn't also find it cringey now? I noticed Hamilton seemed to drop out of the zeitgeist almost overnight at some point. It wasn't as precipitous as Game of Thrones's fall, perhaps, but it was fast. Can you imagine the Obamas saying Hamilton is the “best piece of art in any form that I have ever seen in my life” ( https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/theater/hamilton-takes-a-... ) today…

It certainly plays differently post George Floyd.

I'm not sure how long it took for Rent to feel cringy, but the premise of 20-somethings trying their hardest to avoid getting jobs so they can continue being artists also didn't age well.

Re: The Economics of Broadway Shows

#39
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say the general perception is that it was extremely cringey. Obviously they found a large enough audience that disagreed but I don't think they were a majority. Obviously anecdotal.

>>General perception of extremely cringey I’ll offer a counterpoint. I’ve seen it once live and soon going to see it twice next time it comes to town in a few months. I can’t wait, I’m giddy. A whole lot of people out there clearly are too. I totally get that some people literally can’t understand rap music words. If you are hard of hearing and aren’t familiar with the story, you are totally lost in the audience (ESP…

> As such, it makes me wonder if a second line touring circuit is possible for very small shows to get exposure in other smaller cities (any other city besides NYC)

Cities like SF will keep getting first national tours and have somewhat limited theater space, so it might not make sense to take shows there, but I could see it working for critically acclaimed shows in towns with community theaters and season ticket holder willing to spend $50.

Re: The Economics of Broadway Shows

#40
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main sign it was going to be a success was a performance Lin-Manuel Miranda did at the White House. Listen for where the laughs are; they're not there when you see it on Broadway (and I assume The Public Theater). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNFf7nMIGnE That's important because the premise is high school cringy. Let's take a historical story and set it to rap! If it wasn't so well-executed, it would have come…

I would say the general perception is that it was extremely cringey. Obviously they found a large enough audience that disagreed but I don't think they were a majority. Obviously anecdotal.

Have you seen it? I thought it was incredible. And informative. And I assumed what you described before I saw it
Post reply on HN