Pittsburgh Arts, Regional Theatre, New Work, Producing, Copyright, Labor Unions,
New Products, Coping Skills, J-O-Bs...
Theatre industry news, University & School of Drama Announcements, plus occasional course support for
Carnegie Mellon School of Drama Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni.
The Producer's Perspective: Winning a Best Musical Tony is one thing . . . but recouping?
Nothing gets me more excited than recouping a show, because recouping means three things to a Broadway Producer
1 out of 5 recoupment rate? That's terrifying. There are 29 producers credited to Kinky Boots, which solidifies the idea that it's very hard to get money for Broadway with that kind of average. It's fantastic news for Kinky Boots, but it worries me that this is so thoroughly celebrated. Shouldn't recoupment be expected? Call me naive, but I thought that most industries would go bankrupt with a 1 in 5 chance of breaking even. What the writer said about taking on a riskier show though is quite intelligent; greater risk stands for a greater reward. Basic economics. And it's fantastic that he trusted his team to do a great enough job to make that greater reward possible. Truly, Kinky Boots is a well-oiled machine with all the right elements. It simply worries me that this is a rare thing.
I disagree with Ariel. While most industries would go bankrupt with a 1:5 chance of breaking even, theater isn't most industries. Taking the risk of investing in theater is always hit or miss. You can invest on the large shows like Phantom of the Opera, Wicked, Newsies, Once, etc. The thing about the entertainment industry is that it really is taking the chance to make it big. If a show is successful it is usually wildly successful, while shows that are not tend to fall flat on their faces. That's just the industry we are in, and it is a risk everyone involved in theater takes when they start working.
30 weeks, that's so fast! What a testament to the hard work put into this show. Like the article says, the fact that the show was able to recoup its original 13.5 million will look very well in the eyes of future producers. It's a matter of being consistent in your show and being able to sell out as many performances as possible to please the audience.
Also, Jess and Ariel, the article doesn't say that only 1 out of 5 shows manage to recoup. It said that Kinky Boots was one out of the five shows that recoup their investments this year. With roughly 50 shows on Broadway currently, that's a rate of 1:10.
I think it's great that kinky boots managed to recoup, more than just from an economic standpoint. Sure, it's got great songs, names that will draw crowds, and mass appeal, but it's also a show about a cross-dresser, and ten years ago, or even five, that story might not have sold on a stage this big. A lot of things make this show "safe" (based on a movie, songs by cyndi lauper, etc), but it also pushes the boundaries of traditional broadway, as other shows have been doing for the last 30-ish years, and it's great to see ideas like that are worth keeping around, because people are buying tickets!
I agree with Jess on the topic of investing in anything being a risk. Everyone enters into theatre or any venture with the goal of making a profit, unless it is a charity even or free event. However with the given economic situation you have to always celebrate small victories. Breaking even is a huge victory, especially in such a short space of time. I am sure that winning best musical also helped them achieve this. However this is where the team now has to go into 3rd gear and make profits. This is where the huge victories will be made to ensure that the investors are happy and will be more willing to invest in future projects.
Also I find it interesting that he decided to invest in Kinky Boots because it was more risqué. Maybe that is the route that we need to go with theatre... more risk, less safety and familiarity.
Regardless of the odds, we go into this business knowing it will be risky. Jess brings up a great point that we cant always have a hit show, and there will be ones that just cant make it. I think one thing to remember is that if you have a show that recoups, it means our industry can still survive. We have a wide variety of what we can call theatre and even entertainment. Taking risk is what we do all the time. There isnt really a point of moving forward with a show unless there is something special about it. I think it is less about recouping, but making sure that you do it with the three producer goals in mind. If you get to a place where you achieve those goals, or are fiscally responsible in the beginning, as long as you took a risk, its worth doing and seeing what happens.
I don't think that Kinky Boots being only 1 out of 5 shows to recoup this year is terrifying so much as it is realistic. We are in an economic recession, theatre is expensive, people are going to see it broadways shows as often as the used to. Really we should celebrate the success within our profession, try and see if there were any strategies or approaches that they took that can be adopted to improve or inspire others to overtake such a challenging role. But nobody goes into this business for the money, and I think this article opened peoples eyes to knowing that even "commercial theatre" is hardly as profitable as people mistook it to be.
I feel like 30 weeks is fast for a show to recoup and I'm quite surprised that only 1 out of 5 shows even recoup. To be honest I'm a bit surprised that Kinky Boots did so well because I wasn't that impressed with it, but it if it recouped then I guess audiences do like it. I was curious to see how much Broadway productions cost to stage and I found out that: 'The Book of Mormon' cost $9 million. 'Shrek the Musical' cost $25 million 'Spider-Man Turn Off The Dark' cost $75 million That's such a big difference between them.
8 comments:
1 out of 5 recoupment rate? That's terrifying. There are 29 producers credited to Kinky Boots, which solidifies the idea that it's very hard to get money for Broadway with that kind of average. It's fantastic news for Kinky Boots, but it worries me that this is so thoroughly celebrated. Shouldn't recoupment be expected? Call me naive, but I thought that most industries would go bankrupt with a 1 in 5 chance of breaking even. What the writer said about taking on a riskier show though is quite intelligent; greater risk stands for a greater reward. Basic economics. And it's fantastic that he trusted his team to do a great enough job to make that greater reward possible. Truly, Kinky Boots is a well-oiled machine with all the right elements. It simply worries me that this is a rare thing.
I disagree with Ariel. While most industries would go bankrupt with a 1:5 chance of breaking even, theater isn't most industries. Taking the risk of investing in theater is always hit or miss. You can invest on the large shows like Phantom of the Opera, Wicked, Newsies, Once, etc. The thing about the entertainment industry is that it really is taking the chance to make it big. If a show is successful it is usually wildly successful, while shows that are not tend to fall flat on their faces. That's just the industry we are in, and it is a risk everyone involved in theater takes when they start working.
30 weeks, that's so fast! What a testament to the hard work put into this show. Like the article says, the fact that the show was able to recoup its original 13.5 million will look very well in the eyes of future producers. It's a matter of being consistent in your show and being able to sell out as many performances as possible to please the audience.
Also, Jess and Ariel, the article doesn't say that only 1 out of 5 shows manage to recoup. It said that Kinky Boots was one out of the five shows that recoup their investments this year. With roughly 50 shows on Broadway currently, that's a rate of 1:10.
I think it's great that kinky boots managed to recoup, more than just from an economic standpoint. Sure, it's got great songs, names that will draw crowds, and mass appeal, but it's also a show about a cross-dresser, and ten years ago, or even five, that story might not have sold on a stage this big. A lot of things make this show "safe" (based on a movie, songs by cyndi lauper, etc), but it also pushes the boundaries of traditional broadway, as other shows have been doing for the last 30-ish years, and it's great to see ideas like that are worth keeping around, because people are buying tickets!
I agree with Jess on the topic of investing in anything being a risk. Everyone enters into theatre or any venture with the goal of making a profit, unless it is a charity even or free event. However with the given economic situation you have to always celebrate small victories. Breaking even is a huge victory, especially in such a short space of time. I am sure that winning best musical also helped them achieve this. However this is where the team now has to go into 3rd gear and make profits. This is where the huge victories will be made to ensure that the investors are happy and will be more willing to invest in future projects.
Also I find it interesting that he decided to invest in Kinky Boots because it was more risqué. Maybe that is the route that we need to go with theatre... more risk, less safety and familiarity.
Regardless of the odds, we go into this business knowing it will be risky. Jess brings up a great point that we cant always have a hit show, and there will be ones that just cant make it. I think one thing to remember is that if you have a show that recoups, it means our industry can still survive. We have a wide variety of what we can call theatre and even entertainment. Taking risk is what we do all the time. There isnt really a point of moving forward with a show unless there is something special about it. I think it is less about recouping, but making sure that you do it with the three producer goals in mind. If you get to a place where you achieve those goals, or are fiscally responsible in the beginning, as long as you took a risk, its worth doing and seeing what happens.
I don't think that Kinky Boots being only 1 out of 5 shows to recoup this year is terrifying so much as it is realistic. We are in an economic recession, theatre is expensive, people are going to see it broadways shows as often as the used to. Really we should celebrate the success within our profession, try and see if there were any strategies or approaches that they took that can be adopted to improve or inspire others to overtake such a challenging role. But nobody goes into this business for the money, and I think this article opened peoples eyes to knowing that even "commercial theatre" is hardly as profitable as people mistook it to be.
I feel like 30 weeks is fast for a show to recoup and I'm quite surprised that only 1 out of 5 shows even recoup.
To be honest I'm a bit surprised that Kinky Boots did so well because I wasn't that impressed with it, but it if it recouped then I guess audiences do like it.
I was curious to see how much Broadway productions cost to stage and I found out that:
'The Book of Mormon' cost $9 million.
'Shrek the Musical' cost $25 million
'Spider-Man Turn Off The Dark' cost $75 million
That's such a big difference between them.
Post a Comment