Options for 2014

[accessmenj]

A third possible option is that the tour resumes as a regular(non-SETA) tour. This would allow the tour to stay months in major metropolitan areas, as Rob suggested. Not nine months as in Chicago but two or three months. There are major advantages to a big cities only tour;

1- An area of 5, 10 or 15 million people can fill 1,500 seats per show.
2- Higher prices are expected in major cities.
3- Promotions are more effective when the show is staying awhile.
4- People who like the show can see it again.
5- Word of mouth can be the best advertising.
6- People who like the show can bring parents, children and friends.
7- Big cities are more accepting of gay themes and rough language.
8- Longer stays allow less expensive accommodations than daily hotels.
9- Transportation costs are lower if not moving every week.
10 Touring crew's quality of life is better if not moving every week.
11 Training can be consolidated in one city with the tour(Billy Camp).


Any comments about this option or others?

[rob_hanson1979]

I agree with every one of those points. Especially the issue of word of mouth. You can only build up so much word of mouth if a show is only in a city for 5 days. But if it's there for a longer run, you'll start hearing all this great feedback and all of a sudden it becomes the hottest ticket in town!
Plus if you want to have the show stay in a city for 3 months... you actually only need 3 cities a year. Thats nine months, providing three months for time off, moving cities, promotion, and maybe even a couple shorter stops in smaller cities.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but if a show stays in a city for a longer run, it makes running a smaller theatre more profitable. Meaning if you booka theatre that holds 2500 people, you run the risk of lots of empty seats. But if you run a theatre that holds 1200 people, you are more likely to sell it out, and it also creates a higher demand for tickets.
You could book the major cities, like Boston, Chicago, Washington, Toronto, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Seattle, Vancouver etc for long runs, and you've already got 2-3 years planned just there. And then when we add some smaller cities that could host the show for, say, a month, that probably gives you another 1-2 years of touring. And then you could look at going international.
The point of all this is... I could make the show a lot of money, if only they'd put me in charge!

[accessmenj]

It appears that the SETA tour loses its financial advantage over the standard tour when the touring company is too large and must move frequently to follow the rules. BETM started with 130 people and 12 trailers. It's smaller now, but it still has a lot to move every week. The price of fuel has gone crazy, and the cities are farther apart. It might be impossible to make a decent profit moving weekly.

[ALLMIXEDUP]

Billy Elliot The Musical could return to Broadway after the tour ends. This would be my favorite option.

[ERinVA]

It could come in as a "sit-down" tour, using the Chicago/Toronto sets. I would love that.

[kport]

I agree with every one of those points. Especially the issue of word of mouth. You can only build up so much word of mouth if a show is only in a city for 5 days. But if it's there for a longer run, you'll start hearing all this great feedback and all of a sudden it becomes the hottest ticket in town!
Plus if you want to have the show stay in a city for 3 months... you actually only need 3 cities a year. Thats nine months, providing three months for time off, moving cities, promotion, and maybe even a couple shorter stops in smaller cities.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but if a show stays in a city for a longer run, it makes running a smaller theatre more profitable. Meaning if you booka theatre that holds 2500 people, you run the risk of lots of empty seats. But if you run a theatre that holds 1200 people, you are more likely to sell it out, and it also creates a higher demand for tickets.
You could book the major cities, like Boston, Chicago, Washington, Toronto, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Seattle, Vancouver etc for long runs, and you've already got 2-3 years planned just there. And then when we add some smaller cities that could host the show for, say, a month, that probably gives you another 1-2 years of touring. And then you could look at going international.
The point of all this is... I could make the show a lot of money, if only they'd put me in charge!

Rob - I am sure any of us could give it a go. All we would need is a pot of money set aside as reserves ($5 million would do) so that the production can go into arrears when takings are low and any debts at the end would be covered. Perhaps we could have a quick whip around amongst Forum members to raise that sum (no pesos, please)!

My guess is that the 'pot' set aside by Networks for this production is having trouble growing, and may even be shrinking. If it were turning over a nice increase, it would be a poor business decision to close it down. Just my guess.

[accessmenj]

The option of returning to Broadway is possible because of the talented cast, and the sets are ready to go. And Les Miserables is returning to Broadway in March of 2014.

But Les Miserables returned to Broadway once before with only some success. This is from a Times piece about Les Mis and Cameron Mackintosh.


"Still, Mr. Mackintosh has had misfires too. He acknowledged that he brought “Les Misérables” back to Broadway the last time too soon after the original closed, and said “in hindsight I wish I hadn’t done that, because coming back to New York in 2014 would be much more exciting without the last revival.”

“But there is no such thing as certainty in the theater, other than that you can make a mistake,” Mr. Mackintosh said

It would only be two years since BETM closed on Broadway. That may be too soon.

[rob_hanson1979]

Rob - I am sure any of us could give it a go. All we would need is a pot of money set aside as reserves ($5 million would do) so that the production can go into arrears when takings are low and any debts at the end would be covered. Perhaps we could have a quick whip around amongst Forum members to raise that sum (no pesos, please)!

My guess is that the 'pot' set aside by Networks for this production is having trouble growing, and may even be shrinking. If it were turning over a nice increase, it would be a poor business decision to close it down. Just my guess.

Take this, and this...

[kport]

With no known future for this Tour in evidence, I sincerely hope that the four Billys and two Michaels are given fair consideration for the London production (if still height/voice eligible). They have 'leapt fully formed from the brow of Zeus' and deserve serious consideration - if they are available.

[accessmenj]

The fifth option for 2014 is television. Broadcast networks, cable networks and even satellite tv are all looking for content. They especially want content that will draw young people, since they are the consumers that advertisers want. The Billy Elliot The Musical producers have the ability to make a few pilot shows in a short time, and at a reasonable cost. If BETM wants, I'm sure a television deal can be had.

A television series should start with Billy arriving at The Royal Ballet. It would use flashbacks to the original Billy story. It could use many "retired" Billys, Michaels and Ballet Girls. There certainly is drama and "soap opera" at Ballet school as proven by the recent acid thrown in the face of the ballet school official in Russia. All this would attract younger people. The publicity would help fill the seats at any live performance. Not a bad move for BETM.

Any comments about this option or others?