There was a lot of donor money floating around during the 1980s, so there was capital for these expensive tours. The money for presenting arts tours seems much harder to come by now.
ABT Met Contract Ends in 2015
Posted 08 October 2013 - 07:45 AM
There also used to be a lot more government and non-profit money around. Those Royal Ballet tours were paid for partly by the British Council. However, corporate money was also an important factor. The company was forced to cancel its U.S. tour in 1990 when Barclays Bank balked.
The NBOC very rarely sold out (or anywhere near it) its former venue, except for Nutcracker, and it rarely sells out the Four Seasons Centre (except for Nutcracker and things like Cinderella, Alice, etc.). For most programs, it offers the same 7 performances it always did. They made up for lost revenue in the orchestra seats by upping the ticket prices significantly.
I was relying on an old article from the International Journal of Arts Management.
The Hummingbird Centre has 3,200 seats and played host to 68 performances in the 2005 season. The new venue has 2,000 seats and will require 83 annual performances. If one excludes performances presented outside of Toronto (as part of the company's tours or its Community Outreach program), the question becomes: how will the company be able to match the revenues generated at its previous home venue?
[Kevin] Garland's plan of attack in this regard can be summarized in a single word: increase. The number of performances will be increased from 68 to 83, which explains the $1.4 million annual increase in fixed costs.
Apparently a 50% increase in ticket prices was part of the plan all along. If the company found that it had overestimated ticket demand, then naturally it made little sense to give that many performances. The current total of 77 performances in Toronto (if I've counted correctly), including 23 of The Nutcracker, falls in between the old Hummingbird total and the initial Four Seasons projection. ABT also seldom sells out the Met, so it's entirely possible that its audience could fit into a smaller venue without increasing dramatically its number of performances. But what makes very little sense to me is ABT and NYCB continuing to compete head-to-head when neither is filling up their venue.
Posted 08 October 2013 - 09:51 AM
the silver lining for NBoC is more opportunities for dancers in leading roles. 68 vs 83 performances means an extra 15 performances!
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases (adblockers may block display):