« Martin Luther King Jr. Day | Main | Oscar Nomination Reaction »

January 22, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Isaac, thanks for the numbers. If ensembles are presented with transparent budgets like this, everyone feels like co-producers of the project. They’ll need to be. Best if your ensemble is also the part of company securing donations because on the back of your napkin you’ll need to do the final calculation for your production.

Number of performances allowed times maximum ticket price times maximum paying audience. 20 X 20 X 99 = $39,600.

$60,000 minus $39,600 leaves deficit of $20,400.

So who’s your sugar daddy?

John Clancy

Two comments:

Why don't we cap it at wherever we cap it but exclude theater rental from the budget? It's always going up anyway.

And those numbers are great, but then do the other side. Look at anyone's potential income doing 16 shows at 99 seats. It's not AEA's concern that the producers are unable to break even, but clearly it keeps the territory broke, weak and transitory.

Just got back into the country and haven't read the other posts yet. Will do.

John Clancy

Me again, just read through the comments. Not much to add except, yeah, of course it fucks up the artistic process for all of the reasons stated below. The designers, the writer, the director, the actors, everyone suffers by showing the work for the first time to a paying audience and if you're wildly lucky, to the critics that opening weekend.

Also, most of us who have been doing this for awhile pay our actors much more than the Code requires, so I think I speak for most people in the territory when I say that codifying an increase in actor's pay is central to this reform movement.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad

# of Visitors Since 11/22/05

  • eXTReMe Tracker