| Is that stop clause enforced much? | |
| Posted by: dramedy 02:37 pm EDT 06/26/24 | |
| In reply to: re: In the 1980's and 1990's how low could a show's capacity percentage go and still keep running? - EvFoDr 02:14 pm EDT 06/26/24 | |
|
|
|
| I think most shows just run out of money to burn. And with a basic two show a season cycle, usually a fall show flop has burned through the reserve by spring and similarly summer slump closes before fall shows need a theater. Also, a long time producers doesn’t really want to piss off the theater owners by making them enforce that clause and possibly jeopardize getting prime theaters in the future for new shows. The glaring exception is Chicago which could easily be kicked out but I assume the shuberts would rather get a percentage of 52 weeks at $600k average than have the ambassador theater vacant for huge periods of time between poor performing plays that rarely reach $600k for a few weeks of a 3 month run. |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | re: In the 1980's and 1990's how low could a show's capacity percentage go and still keep running? - EvFoDr 02:14 pm EDT 06/26/24 |
| Next: | re: Is that stop clause enforced much? - EvFoDr 06:32 pm EDT 06/26/24 |
| Thread: |
|
Time to render: 0.053591 seconds.