Straight off the bat, I want to say that touring sounds like hell – and not just because I am a homebody that does not like to go places or do things. It is crazy how many things a touring manager must keep track of – two of the Broadway managers mentioned knowing where the hospitals and doctors are in each town. These are the sort of minute details that would probably drive me insane. Also full disclosure, we all know my background is not in the performing arts.
That said, it’s actually pretty interesting that the touring system hasn’t changed since the 19th century – even the book struggled to mention the use of modern technology in the managing end of the process. (Which is weird, when you have megastars like the Biebs who tour constantly, and use social media even more. Maybe it’s an audience thing. Irrelevant).
I think that a great deal of why the touring system “works” is because there will always be type As willing to do everything for a production, including but not limited to finding the nearest throat and mouth doctor in each city. There’s also money to be made – as previous posts have extrapolated, we don’t think of nonprofit companies as touring ones. As long as the money keeps flowing, the system remains “stable”. However, I think a paradigm shift of our culture means it isn’t the best way of doing things anymore. In class, we discussed how shows produced on the east coast might do well on the coasts, but not in the center of the country. The culture we live in has shifted from one of mass appeal to niche subcultures, and I think that will slowly lead to the demise of the touring system [again: no theater experience outside of high school, but hear me out].
The Cincinnati Playhouse in the Park (http://cincyplay.com/Default.aspx), thanks to a previous artistic director’s personal life, has an interesting relationship with The Repertory Theatre of St. Louis. Annually, both houses produce shows that then travel to the other theatre for the second half of the season. It’s not touring, in the sense of the business side of things, and it especially looks different than modern touring when you consider that both shows are ‘in residency’ for about a month. It isn’t widely publicized that the actors, directors, and designers are from St. Louis, you have to really dig to find the reference to it on the Playhouse’s website. It’s sort of like a tour without any of the risks: Cincinnati has cheap housing near the theatre, the company gets to settle and is really only away for a month, and the producing house has already made back their investment from the original run.
It would be nice, of course, if something wild and shocking came to the Cincinnati Playhouse, and not Brighton Beach Memoirs, and we can talk all day about the desire to express and bring artistic truths to those who haven’t heard them, but that isn’t happening. Anywhere. Presenting agencies spend loads on market research to decide where they’ll make their money and go to those places.
Which brings me back to my point, which we all learned in marketing: mass culture isn’t a thing anymore. The mega-musicals of the 1980s appealed to everyone, but our society has shifted to the point where appealing to everyone isn’t good enough. You have to court each consumer, which is what I think this relationship between the St. Louis theatre and Cincinnati theatre does. Both subcultures are more or less the same, but they’re far away enough that there wouldn’t be overlap in constituencies. If all theatres had similar relationships, and “toured” select shows to other cities, the need for presenting companies slowly dies and all we have left are the big Broadway blockbusters hopping around like lunatics.
[Not a relevant note: Found the WQED touring blog boring as all get out. While they endeavored to discuss the musical aspects of the tour, it reads more like a bad travel blog. Why don’t you show me a picture of a gooseberry if you’re going to devote a paragraph to using it as a dessert garnish. For all the blog talks about food, you’d think it’d just be an Instagram account. I digress, but before I end this tangent, the PSO’s blog font is too damn small. Jesse? Cheng? I’ll hold you two personally responsible.]
If what you said is true that the cultural shifting will slowly lead to the demise of the touring system, I'll be really sad.....Does it mean that I won't be able to watch Wicked unless I fly to Broadway? I think one of the reasons why the touring system exists and "works" is that it significantly diversifies the cultural opportunities available to the tour region, both national and international. I agree with you that mass culture isn't a thing any more. However, just because the show makes success in broadway or other home cities and starts touring doesn't necessarily mean that it represents mass culture. It just proves its artistic and market value, and audience not resident in that city deserve the opportunity to enjoy a good show like that. Besides, usually the shows originally produced in other cities or countries are somewhat fresh and exotic. New and popular things are always appealing to audience. The local presenting organizations are responsible to bring in good and different shows that their audience may not get a chance to watch in the city, through which the cultural exchange and diversity are greatly improved. Of course, if the touring productions can be creative to court the resident customer, that would be more perfect.
Hi Rachael! I'm going to try to comment on as much of your post as I can - you bring up a lot of interesting points and opinions.
In regard to the essential job functions of a touring manager, I think it's all a matter of perspective. From my observations during my time at the School of Drama, effective T.D.'s and stage managers did enough preparation beforehand to ensure that foreseeable and unforeseeable problems will be mitigated. To them, I think it's just a part of the job (or, maybe a part of their lives - if they're dedicated). They're unsung heroes, for sure, but I guess the extra burden has to fall on someone (until actors are replaced by robots).
I think the book doesn't touch on technological tools for the touring process because it was written in 2008. I'm not sure social media would benefit the larger touring companies (feel free to disagree), but perhaps it would help the small ones in bringing in audiences. I'm interested as well in how technology improves the managing process ("Is there an app for that?" Is what I'm basically pondering - especially for companies just starting out).
I agree that most touring companies (at least from a theatrical perspective) showcase shows that aren't necessarily "avant-garde," but I think that's the nature of the beast. I'm kind of skeptical of what we "learned" in marketing, when placed in the context of touring theatrical productions. Marketing has certainly evolved from being producer-based to consumer-based, yet selling tickets to a tour of Rent is different than selling deodorant. I just don't see demand for Rent or Wicked waning simply because they don't switch marketing styles. Don't get me wrong, I would like it if some touring Broadway company could personally compel me to see one of their shows, but I don't think successful productions will get enough ROI to justify such actions. The example you brought up for "touring-residencies" is interesting, but I'd definitely like research each participating organization to see if they are honoring their missions, or just chasing the money.
Howdy Wilkinson. To answer your questions and concerns:
YES, the font is WAY too small. The content on tour is often interesting (and written by musicians), but can be a bit all over the place. I have a laundry list of issues with that blog that aren't relevant to touring, but font is definitely number one. As for WQED, I don't know what's going on there...
ALSO, the PSO instagram is on tour with the assistant conductor, and has had a few interesting tidbits. The same conductor has done fabulous behind the scenes videos on tour in the past, but I believe he decided they weren't worth his effort this year...assistant conductors don't get paid anywhere in the same range as musicians. It's a shame someone isn't picking up the slack or finding a way to make that happen.....
I believe one of the WQED radio personalities was following the PSO on its tour, as he has done in past years. I really don't know much more about it though...
I miss those Loh-Down videos!! I don't think this is sensitive "insider info" since it's obvious from the PSO Facebook page, but it's really interesting to note how much the volume of "likes" and comments increases for visual content compared to URLS and other text, such as Maestro Loh's (fabulous) Instagram tour feed and the PR department's photos. Living proof that people truly respond well to feeling like they are somewhere they aren't! Not to be biased, but they have done a great job showing their fans glimpses into the process of putting on performances while on tour, not only the product. Showing the artists rehearsing, conversing with international stakeholders, or even simply bonding with one another backstage, is essential for "humanizing" the organization and its brand - something that can be especially challenging for larger organizations. Rohit Bhargava, author of "Likeonomics," emphasized the importance of the human element in his closing keynote talk at the AWESOME National Arts Marketing Conference this weekend. The classical music world, which tends to present musical groups as very homogenous and even anonymous (e.g. everyone wearing concert black, and a lack of "breaking the 4th wall" by speaking to the audience), can surely learn a lot from this idea.
Also, speaking of touring: is anyone concerned that digital technologies/social media/etc. will edge out the demand for live performances, namely touring productions, since such technology has the ability to make physical distance practically irrelevant? Personally, I think live experiences are a completely different animal than listening to a recording or watching a YouTube clip, so I seek out both types, but not everyone may make that distinction. Discuss!
Your comment about the decline of mass audience appeal got me thinking about the upcoming release of the "Les Miserables" movie (and other recent musical films). I think it's safe to assume that MAMs will fight to the death to protect and support live performance. However, when you've got the same artistic content in both situations (I'm only talking about the actual show, not the travesty that is Anne Hathaway as Fantine, OK I'm done complaining), isn't it logical to choose the cheaper and more familiar option?
It's the "Glee" Effect: re-acquainting audiences with musicals in a way that is accessible. In some ways, I think the film versions of these shows can help sell tickets because people are now able to associate the title with something in their vernacular. It's also great for actors to bridge their film and stage careers. There are at least some redeeming qualities to these kinds of productions.
That said, I think these programs have had a significantly negative effect on the demand for live touring performances. As we've established, tour producers want to make a profit. Therefore, as you mentioned, they are going to go where the audiences are, which typically ends up being in larger cities and on the coasts. I won't go into a break down of American audiences because we've been there and done that, but it does bear re-stating that the convenience of seeing "The World's Most Beloved Musical" for $12 in a familiar environment is just more enticing to most people than going outside their comfort zone to see it live in a theater.
I agree with Yingjie that if this is the trend for performing arts, it's depressing. We can try to look on the bright side and talk about how movie musicals and "Glee" bring people into the audience who have never been there before, but the decline of tours in middle America suggests that the numbers do not even out. The performing arts cannot be allowed to become an attraction that most Americans only participate in when they visit New York. It needs to be a valued experience in people's everyday lives. I'm not saying that tours need to visit every town in the United States, and I'm not saying that people need to go see every Broadway tour that comes through. However, if we allow these local experiences to be replaced by film and TV, we should all switch to being MEIMs because we'll all be out of a job.
One possible solution that we should maybe give more consideration to is the idea of non-profit touring, even as the sole activity of an organization. Maybe taking a production around to small towns throughout Iowa (<3 you Rachael) is more important to the survival of the performing arts than hoping people will travel to see the show during a four week run in the nearest city. Perhaps if we take a page from the cinema notebook and focus on finding a way to produce quality live performance experiences that are convenient and affordable, we'll be able to even out audience attendance with ratings. I don't have any concrete ideas about how that model would be structured or how to resolve the myriad of issues that would come with such a system, but if it will enhance the value of live performing arts in America over "Glee" then I'm willing to give it a shot.
Interestingly there are many tours in the Midwest....the content is however skewed to a different aesthetic. And furthermore most regions also have touring passages or patterns. Nonprofits, however, can only get onto the touring model if it is relevant to their mission which is usually local AND if there is distinct funding for it (more common in dance).
The Glee effect is, however, more insidious. As we will discuss...the movies of opera actually hurt the local opera companies...regardless of their content or season. Les Mis the movie will generate some audience for the stage play but will likely make audiences even more complacent.
Finally, there are some management tools (arts edge) but limited on a national scope. Most theaters customize their existing payroll or hr systems with Office products.
I dunno - I don't think that there will ever stop being a demand for touring Broadway Musicals. And I also don't think that Rachael is suggesting that is what is going to happen. I mean, look at Pittsburgh - War Horse, Sister Act, Book of Mormon, Chicago (ugh why? Aren't we DONE with Chicago now?) - and that's all within one year. My mom goes to Broadway tours ALL THE TIME, and she only live two hours away from NYC. My first Broadway experience was a touring production of the Secret Garden when I was like 7 years old.
Because of the nature of the Broadway show (big, flashy, high production values) people will always see the value in getting to go to a touring production for $35 bucks plus 5-10 miles of gas versus $135 bucks plus a plane or train ticket to NYC. And yes, movies and TV - but as far as Les Miserables goes, based on what I've read, most of the people that are really really into seeing it are the ones who have already seen it on stage. (BTW, I have no problems with Anne Hathaway as Fantine - why are we not more worried about Russell Crowe as Javert? He's gonna sing "Stars"? Yeah?) And Chicago was a movie, and they're apparently still selling tickets (again, no idea why).
I think that the issue Rachael is talking about is everything BUT Broadway shows. And I think that she's probably right. I think that if you want people to buy tickets to something, they better recognize something about it (the title, the star, a song) or else they aren't going to take the risk. FOR EXAMPLE:
Future Tenant just spent a boatload of money to bring in an artist from New York to do a weekend-long residency with her interactive "iPod Noir". New York Times-reviewed, Edinburgh Fringe alum show. It was hot on the heels of the Bricolage bringing through STRATA, which everybody seemed to love and which was a similarly interactive show, and it all looked like so much fun, we thought we'd sell it out no problem. Because Pittsburgh is an artsy town and lots of people are willing to do this sort of thing etc. And, we couldn't have been more wrong. Despite buying ads, getting fairly decent press coverage and talking it up like crazy, we couldn't even sell out one day. And I really think that it's because most people weren't willing to spend $25 for something they hadn't heard of before, presented by a gallery that they maybe hadn't heard of before that is definitely not known for doing these sorts of things. There's a laundry list of things I probably would have done differently in bringing that show in, and we might have done a bit better if we had spent our marketing dollars in a different way (gotta love learning experiences) but, yeah. Presenting is hard.
Because I'm an internet troll, let's say that I disagree with every point each one of you made. Every. One. Broadway tours are stupid, degrade the art form, and only create terrible knockoffs like the Les Miz movie. The entire touring system creates social inequities where only those who a. Live in a city that the tour is visiting and b. can afford a ticket can participate in the art form. A much more democratic system would involve the presentation of all shows over the internet. It's much cheaper and closes the THOUSANDS of gaps in between touring cities and Broadway.
Also all marketing should be done over social media because that's what the youths are doing. Discuss.
Most importantly: The new Les Miz movie looks incredible - they are live singing, which is something that is very new and exciting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwgQjfg0hZw
Broadway tours are not stupid, nor do they degrade the art form. They bring The Great White Way to those who cannot afford to come to New York City.
I am not sure if I understand this logic of the social inequity idea that you are suggesting. Traveling Broadway is not that terribly expensive. Yes, you may not be able to sit in the center orchestra, but that's why the Benedum is massive. You can get tickets for as low as $59.
I agree that putting shows on the internet makes viewing more democratic. However, I also think that if that happens, then the productions themselves may not be able financially stable and it would jeopardize the financial longevity of touring. Again, I think it's a good idea to have shows streamed on the interwebs, but to replace traveling broadway with this, no. You can't compare watching a live broadway show to watching it on your computer, it's not the same thing and it waters down the experience.
Are you referring solely to touring for this strictly online marketing strategy or marketing in general?
I think that it would be foolish for all marketing to move to social media. Presenters would be alienating a population that have historically supported the art form. While, I do think that organizations should market to the "youths" in innovative and new ways, I don't think most youths have the disposable income to attend these events. So, not only are you jeopardizing having an audience , you would offend those who do not engage in social media (and yes, Rachael, there are still people out there who don't engage in social media and don't call them dumb). Ready, set, comment!
Obviously I am in love with Anne Hathaway and super excited about the movie.
My thoughts behind the social inequity comment come from that of growing up in a rural area, and there are a couple of expenses going into that equation. Off the bat, no one goes to plays alone, so that $59 ticket is at least doubled. Growing up, if you went to see a touring Broadway performance, it was probably in the next town over. I never saw a performance closer than the city of Chicago - and that was three hours away on a good day. So we need to include the cost of gas. And we went to evening performances, and driving three hours home at midnight isn't something people do, so you need to add a night in a hotel. What the presenting companies look at as a very reasonable ticket price for the service they are providing doesn't include the real cost that rural communities face when considering if they should go see the show or a movie - if they have a movie theater.
I don't suppose I'm suggesting that all marketing move to social media, so much as marketing has to make the shift from mass marketing to niche, subculture marketing (which is easier through social media, but I assume there are traditional ways still).
People not on social media are not dumb. Organizations, presenting groups, and producing companies not on social media are dumb. Organizations, presenting groups, and producing companies that are on social media but do not have a clear link to their social media pages from their websites are the dumbest.
Rachael...you point out the critical difference....not Midwest but rural. People in West Virginia or even Pennsylvania have a similar rural concern.
Additionally the issue of cumulative expense is key. Look at the competition. A movie is the price comparison....anything else and you are on the high side, yes?
Finally the issue of youth and the arts is a wonderful topic to discuss further in marketing. Price and web do not seem to be the sole solution... But it can help. While all digitized arts are steps away from the original which is fundamentally tied to the group experience and exchange (communitas), it is interesting to note that the National Theatre of London has done an online viewing option as well as a view it in a theatre in digitized format model as well .... With the latter selling out. I need to find data on the web version. So, it is definitely available....(and coming soon from Bway), but not really attracting a younger demographic is my bet.
Rachael, You have taken some very strong opinions here. Thank you for keeping things spicy. What I thought I was going to hear from you, included lots of thoughts about what kind of online database could be created that would help tour managers better access doctors and hospitals as well as late night restaurant and clubs. I am not sure if there is any online platform where touring companies write reviews and talk about their experiences in detail in order to help provide useful tips for other large touring companies, but I feel like it may be a good idea. I realize that platforms such as facebook and trip advisor may be helpful to an extent, but I think the specificity of touring life could lend itself to a need for its own online platform. This could be helpful not only for tour managers to quickly access doctors who work with touring companies quickly and may be able to process out of town insurance claims if an actor gets sick, but also hospitality reviews: who was able to negotiate a group rating with which hotel, etc. It seems to me like there may be an opportunity here for the development of some helpful online platforms (it could even be an APP) that would work to make better everyone's experiences while on the road, and be tailored to the touring lifestyle so that specific details can be included.
Oh my gosh that is genius, that would be a great app. I can't decide if it would be better as an umbrella app with a social aspect (so people can share information), or a few smaller apps (like one that searches for doctors and insurance while you're on the road is separate from the one where you review your experiences?). Let's Kickstart this thing.
Okay - lets try this again. Hopefully I remember everything....
Hello Ladies and gents,
There is one thing in particular that Rachael said that I found to be really pertinent - "mass culture isn’t a thing anymore." After attending the National Arts Marketing Project Conference this weekend, I have to say that this is VERY true. Attendees, stakeholders, and constituents want more than just one option - they want diversity, variety, and uniqueness.
Thus, I think that Jessie's idea about an app is particularly intriguing - however, I think it might be applied better when geared to attendees rather than arts organizations. What if a person in Seattle, WA could download an app about Chicago's Looking Glass Theater's tour of Peter Pan and follow updates as they tour across the country to their city? The app could include insider information like behind the scenes images, fun facts, or interesting aspects of the performance - but also, it could include key information like the address of his/her performance, any dates/cancellations/delays, etc.
In addition, if this app included a section for donations - then money could be made as well. We have all seen the harshness that touring can have for an arts organization. What if some of those elements were showcased in the app and viewed by customers? This emotional connection may entice some people to donate who would not have donated previously.
What are your thoughts? Do you think that arts organizations will ever take this kind of technology this far? I was impressed to see that some perf. arts organizations have already started adopting this sort of technology in their theaters, but no one has quite yet adapted it to mobile....
First - as one who has managed a small tour - Jessie's app idea is genius!
Second - and slightly off topic - for me one of the most compelling aspects of national touring is also my favorite thing about the Chautauqua movement. It builds a more universal familiarity with the theatrical (or musical) cannon and allows for the development of a common language of culture. If Aunt Dorris in Omaha and little Susie in Seattle can both see War Horse, they now have a shared experience and a common reference. Part of the role of the arts is to create national culture, and this necessitates making the art available to a wide spectrum of the population (both geographically and economically).
I love Kate’s thought of the national culture, and I can’t agree more. It is one of the reasons that I really hope that touring doesn’t fade away. I have loved being able to share different shows with my family in Oklahoma as I have lived in different parts of the country (California, Nevada, and now Pennsylvania). Another note to touring, I have been a part of many small towns in several states, and touring productions were often the only chance of seeing top quality performances. I truly believe they are so important to all of these small towns, including mid-America, for the education of arts.
Straight off the bat, I want to say that touring sounds like hell – and not just because I am a homebody that does not like to go places or do things. It is crazy how many things a touring manager must keep track of – two of the Broadway managers mentioned knowing where the hospitals and doctors are in each town. These are the sort of minute details that would probably drive me insane. Also full disclosure, we all know my background is not in the performing arts.
ReplyDeleteThat said, it’s actually pretty interesting that the touring system hasn’t changed since the 19th century – even the book struggled to mention the use of modern technology in the managing end of the process. (Which is weird, when you have megastars like the Biebs who tour constantly, and use social media even more. Maybe it’s an audience thing. Irrelevant).
I think that a great deal of why the touring system “works” is because there will always be type As willing to do everything for a production, including but not limited to finding the nearest throat and mouth doctor in each city. There’s also money to be made – as previous posts have extrapolated, we don’t think of nonprofit companies as touring ones. As long as the money keeps flowing, the system remains “stable”. However, I think a paradigm shift of our culture means it isn’t the best way of doing things anymore.
In class, we discussed how shows produced on the east coast might do well on the coasts, but not in the center of the country. The culture we live in has shifted from one of mass appeal to niche subcultures, and I think that will slowly lead to the demise of the touring system [again: no theater experience outside of high school, but hear me out].
The Cincinnati Playhouse in the Park (http://cincyplay.com/Default.aspx), thanks to a previous artistic director’s personal life, has an interesting relationship with The Repertory Theatre of St. Louis. Annually, both houses produce shows that then travel to the other theatre for the second half of the season. It’s not touring, in the sense of the business side of things, and it especially looks different than modern touring when you consider that both shows are ‘in residency’ for about a month. It isn’t widely publicized that the actors, directors, and designers are from St. Louis, you have to really dig to find the reference to it on the Playhouse’s website. It’s sort of like a tour without any of the risks: Cincinnati has cheap housing near the theatre, the company gets to settle and is really only away for a month, and the producing house has already made back their investment from the original run.
It would be nice, of course, if something wild and shocking came to the Cincinnati Playhouse, and not Brighton Beach Memoirs, and we can talk all day about the desire to express and bring artistic truths to those who haven’t heard them, but that isn’t happening. Anywhere. Presenting agencies spend loads on market research to decide where they’ll make their money and go to those places.
Which brings me back to my point, which we all learned in marketing: mass culture isn’t a thing anymore. The mega-musicals of the 1980s appealed to everyone, but our society has shifted to the point where appealing to everyone isn’t good enough. You have to court each consumer, which is what I think this relationship between the St. Louis theatre and Cincinnati theatre does. Both subcultures are more or less the same, but they’re far away enough that there wouldn’t be overlap in constituencies. If all theatres had similar relationships, and “toured” select shows to other cities, the need for presenting companies slowly dies and all we have left are the big Broadway blockbusters hopping around like lunatics.
[Not a relevant note: Found the WQED touring blog boring as all get out. While they endeavored to discuss the musical aspects of the tour, it reads more like a bad travel blog. Why don’t you show me a picture of a gooseberry if you’re going to devote a paragraph to using it as a dessert garnish. For all the blog talks about food, you’d think it’d just be an Instagram account. I digress, but before I end this tangent, the PSO’s blog font is too damn small. Jesse? Cheng? I’ll hold you two personally responsible.]
DeleteIf what you said is true that the cultural shifting will slowly lead to the demise of the touring system, I'll be really sad.....Does it mean that I won't be able to watch Wicked unless I fly to Broadway?
DeleteI think one of the reasons why the touring system exists and "works" is that it significantly diversifies the cultural opportunities available to the tour region, both national and international. I agree with you that mass culture isn't a thing any more. However, just because the show makes success in broadway or other home cities and starts touring doesn't necessarily mean that it represents mass culture. It just proves its artistic and market value, and audience not resident in that city deserve the opportunity to enjoy a good show like that. Besides, usually the shows originally produced in other cities or countries are somewhat fresh and exotic. New and popular things are always appealing to audience. The local presenting organizations are responsible to bring in good and different shows that their audience may not get a chance to watch in the city, through which the cultural exchange and diversity are greatly improved. Of course, if the touring productions can be creative to court the resident customer, that would be more perfect.
Hi Rachael! I'm going to try to comment on as much of your post as I can - you bring up a lot of interesting points and opinions.
DeleteIn regard to the essential job functions of a touring manager, I think it's all a matter of perspective. From my observations during my time at the School of Drama, effective T.D.'s and stage managers did enough preparation beforehand to ensure that foreseeable and unforeseeable problems will be mitigated. To them, I think it's just a part of the job (or, maybe a part of their lives - if they're dedicated). They're unsung heroes, for sure, but I guess the extra burden has to fall on someone (until actors are replaced by robots).
I think the book doesn't touch on technological tools for the touring process because it was written in 2008. I'm not sure social media would benefit the larger touring companies (feel free to disagree), but perhaps it would help the small ones in bringing in audiences. I'm interested as well in how technology improves the managing process ("Is there an app for that?" Is what I'm basically pondering - especially for companies just starting out).
I agree that most touring companies (at least from a theatrical perspective) showcase shows that aren't necessarily "avant-garde," but I think that's the nature of the beast. I'm kind of skeptical of what we "learned" in marketing, when placed in the context of touring theatrical productions. Marketing has certainly evolved from being producer-based to consumer-based, yet selling tickets to a tour of Rent is different than selling deodorant. I just don't see demand for Rent or Wicked waning simply because they don't switch marketing styles. Don't get me wrong, I would like it if some touring Broadway company could personally compel me to see one of their shows, but I don't think successful productions will get enough ROI to justify such actions. The example you brought up for "touring-residencies" is interesting, but I'd definitely like research each participating organization to see if they are honoring their missions, or just chasing the money.
Howdy Wilkinson. To answer your questions and concerns:
ReplyDeleteYES, the font is WAY too small. The content on tour is often interesting (and written by musicians), but can be a bit all over the place. I have a laundry list of issues with that blog that aren't relevant to touring, but font is definitely number one. As for WQED, I don't know what's going on there...
ALSO, the PSO instagram is on tour with the assistant conductor, and has had a few interesting tidbits. The same conductor has done fabulous behind the scenes videos on tour in the past, but I believe he decided they weren't worth his effort this year...assistant conductors don't get paid anywhere in the same range as musicians. It's a shame someone isn't picking up the slack or finding a way to make that happen.....
I believe one of the WQED radio personalities was following the PSO on its tour, as he has done in past years. I really don't know much more about it though...
DeleteI miss those Loh-Down videos!! I don't think this is sensitive "insider info" since it's obvious from the PSO Facebook page, but it's really interesting to note how much the volume of "likes" and comments increases for visual content compared to URLS and other text, such as Maestro Loh's (fabulous) Instagram tour feed and the PR department's photos. Living proof that people truly respond well to feeling like they are somewhere they aren't! Not to be biased, but they have done a great job showing their fans glimpses into the process of putting on performances while on tour, not only the product. Showing the artists rehearsing, conversing with international stakeholders, or even simply bonding with one another backstage, is essential for "humanizing" the organization and its brand - something that can be especially challenging for larger organizations. Rohit Bhargava, author of "Likeonomics," emphasized the importance of the human element in his closing keynote talk at the AWESOME National Arts Marketing Conference this weekend. The classical music world, which tends to present musical groups as very homogenous and even anonymous (e.g. everyone wearing concert black, and a lack of "breaking the 4th wall" by speaking to the audience), can surely learn a lot from this idea.
Also, speaking of touring: is anyone concerned that digital technologies/social media/etc. will edge out the demand for live performances, namely touring productions, since such technology has the ability to make physical distance practically irrelevant? Personally, I think live experiences are a completely different animal than listening to a recording or watching a YouTube clip, so I seek out both types, but not everyone may make that distinction. Discuss!
Your comment about the decline of mass audience appeal got me thinking about the upcoming release of the "Les Miserables" movie (and other recent musical films). I think it's safe to assume that MAMs will fight to the death to protect and support live performance. However, when you've got the same artistic content in both situations (I'm only talking about the actual show, not the travesty that is Anne Hathaway as Fantine, OK I'm done complaining), isn't it logical to choose the cheaper and more familiar option?
ReplyDeleteIt's the "Glee" Effect: re-acquainting audiences with musicals in a way that is accessible. In some ways, I think the film versions of these shows can help sell tickets because people are now able to associate the title with something in their vernacular. It's also great for actors to bridge their film and stage careers. There are at least some redeeming qualities to these kinds of productions.
That said, I think these programs have had a significantly negative effect on the demand for live touring performances. As we've established, tour producers want to make a profit. Therefore, as you mentioned, they are going to go where the audiences are, which typically ends up being in larger cities and on the coasts. I won't go into a break down of American audiences because we've been there and done that, but it does bear re-stating that the convenience of seeing "The World's Most Beloved Musical" for $12 in a familiar environment is just more enticing to most people than going outside their comfort zone to see it live in a theater.
I agree with Yingjie that if this is the trend for performing arts, it's depressing. We can try to look on the bright side and talk about how movie musicals and "Glee" bring people into the audience who have never been there before, but the decline of tours in middle America suggests that the numbers do not even out. The performing arts cannot be allowed to become an attraction that most Americans only participate in when they visit New York. It needs to be a valued experience in people's everyday lives. I'm not saying that tours need to visit every town in the United States, and I'm not saying that people need to go see every Broadway tour that comes through. However, if we allow these local experiences to be replaced by film and TV, we should all switch to being MEIMs because we'll all be out of a job.
One possible solution that we should maybe give more consideration to is the idea of non-profit touring, even as the sole activity of an organization. Maybe taking a production around to small towns throughout Iowa (<3 you Rachael) is more important to the survival of the performing arts than hoping people will travel to see the show during a four week run in the nearest city. Perhaps if we take a page from the cinema notebook and focus on finding a way to produce quality live performance experiences that are convenient and affordable, we'll be able to even out audience attendance with ratings. I don't have any concrete ideas about how that model would be structured or how to resolve the myriad of issues that would come with such a system, but if it will enhance the value of live performing arts in America over "Glee" then I'm willing to give it a shot.
Interestingly there are many tours in the Midwest....the content is however skewed to a different aesthetic. And furthermore most regions also have touring passages or patterns. Nonprofits, however, can only get onto the touring model if it is relevant to their mission which is usually local AND if there is distinct funding for it (more common in dance).
DeleteThe Glee effect is, however, more insidious. As we will discuss...the movies of opera actually hurt the local opera companies...regardless of their content or season. Les Mis the movie will generate some audience for the stage play but will likely make audiences even more complacent.
Finally, there are some management tools (arts edge) but limited on a national scope. Most theaters customize their existing payroll or hr systems with Office products.
I dunno - I don't think that there will ever stop being a demand for touring Broadway Musicals. And I also don't think that Rachael is suggesting that is what is going to happen. I mean, look at Pittsburgh - War Horse, Sister Act, Book of Mormon, Chicago (ugh why? Aren't we DONE with Chicago now?) - and that's all within one year. My mom goes to Broadway tours ALL THE TIME, and she only live two hours away from NYC. My first Broadway experience was a touring production of the Secret Garden when I was like 7 years old.
ReplyDeleteBecause of the nature of the Broadway show (big, flashy, high production values) people will always see the value in getting to go to a touring production for $35 bucks plus 5-10 miles of gas versus $135 bucks plus a plane or train ticket to NYC. And yes, movies and TV - but as far as Les Miserables goes, based on what I've read, most of the people that are really really into seeing it are the ones who have already seen it on stage. (BTW, I have no problems with Anne Hathaway as Fantine - why are we not more worried about Russell Crowe as Javert? He's gonna sing "Stars"? Yeah?) And Chicago was a movie, and they're apparently still selling tickets (again, no idea why).
I think that the issue Rachael is talking about is everything BUT Broadway shows. And I think that she's probably right. I think that if you want people to buy tickets to something, they better recognize something about it (the title, the star, a song) or else they aren't going to take the risk. FOR EXAMPLE:
Future Tenant just spent a boatload of money to bring in an artist from New York to do a weekend-long residency with her interactive "iPod Noir". New York Times-reviewed, Edinburgh Fringe alum show. It was hot on the heels of the Bricolage bringing through STRATA, which everybody seemed to love and which was a similarly interactive show, and it all looked like so much fun, we thought we'd sell it out no problem. Because Pittsburgh is an artsy town and lots of people are willing to do this sort of thing etc. And, we couldn't have been more wrong. Despite buying ads, getting fairly decent press coverage and talking it up like crazy, we couldn't even sell out one day. And I really think that it's because most people weren't willing to spend $25 for something they hadn't heard of before, presented by a gallery that they maybe hadn't heard of before that is definitely not known for doing these sorts of things. There's a laundry list of things I probably would have done differently in bringing that show in, and we might have done a bit better if we had spent our marketing dollars in a different way (gotta love learning experiences) but, yeah. Presenting is hard.
Because I'm an internet troll, let's say that I disagree with every point each one of you made. Every. One. Broadway tours are stupid, degrade the art form, and only create terrible knockoffs like the Les Miz movie. The entire touring system creates social inequities where only those who a. Live in a city that the tour is visiting and b. can afford a ticket can participate in the art form. A much more democratic system would involve the presentation of all shows over the internet. It's much cheaper and closes the THOUSANDS of gaps in between touring cities and Broadway.
ReplyDeleteAlso all marketing should be done over social media because that's what the youths are doing. Discuss.
Couple of things:
DeleteMost importantly: The new Les Miz movie looks incredible - they are live singing, which is something that is very new and exciting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwgQjfg0hZw
Broadway tours are not stupid, nor do they degrade the art form. They bring The Great White Way to those who cannot afford to come to New York City.
I am not sure if I understand this logic of the social inequity idea that you are suggesting. Traveling Broadway is not that terribly expensive. Yes, you may not be able to sit in the center orchestra, but that's why the Benedum is massive. You can get tickets for as low as $59.
I agree that putting shows on the internet makes viewing more democratic. However, I also think that if that happens, then the productions themselves may not be able financially stable and it would jeopardize the financial longevity of touring. Again, I think it's a good idea to have shows streamed on the interwebs, but to replace traveling broadway with this, no. You can't compare watching a live broadway show to watching it on your computer, it's not the same thing and it waters down the experience.
Are you referring solely to touring for this strictly online marketing strategy or marketing in general?
I think that it would be foolish for all marketing to move to social media. Presenters would be alienating a population that have historically supported the art form. While, I do think that organizations should market to the "youths" in innovative and new ways, I don't think most youths have the disposable income to attend these events. So, not only are you jeopardizing having an audience , you would offend those who do not engage in social media (and yes, Rachael, there are still people out there who don't engage in social media and don't call them dumb). Ready, set, comment!
Couple of bones I am willing to pick:
DeleteObviously I am in love with Anne Hathaway and super excited about the movie.
My thoughts behind the social inequity comment come from that of growing up in a rural area, and there are a couple of expenses going into that equation. Off the bat, no one goes to plays alone, so that $59 ticket is at least doubled. Growing up, if you went to see a touring Broadway performance, it was probably in the next town over. I never saw a performance closer than the city of Chicago - and that was three hours away on a good day. So we need to include the cost of gas. And we went to evening performances, and driving three hours home at midnight isn't something people do, so you need to add a night in a hotel. What the presenting companies look at as a very reasonable ticket price for the service they are providing doesn't include the real cost that rural communities face when considering if they should go see the show or a movie - if they have a movie theater.
I don't suppose I'm suggesting that all marketing move to social media, so much as marketing has to make the shift from mass marketing to niche, subculture marketing (which is easier through social media, but I assume there are traditional ways still).
People not on social media are not dumb. Organizations, presenting groups, and producing companies not on social media are dumb. Organizations, presenting groups, and producing companies that are on social media but do not have a clear link to their social media pages from their websites are the dumbest.
Rachael...you point out the critical difference....not Midwest but rural. People in West Virginia or even Pennsylvania have a similar rural concern.
DeleteAdditionally the issue of cumulative expense is key. Look at the competition. A movie is the price comparison....anything else and you are on the high side, yes?
Finally the issue of youth and the arts is a wonderful topic to discuss further in marketing. Price and web do not seem to be the sole solution... But it can help. While all digitized arts are steps away from the original which is fundamentally tied to the group experience and exchange (communitas), it is interesting to note that the National Theatre of London has done an online viewing option as well as a view it in a theatre in digitized format model as well .... With the latter selling out. I need to find data on the web version. So, it is definitely available....(and coming soon from Bway), but not really attracting a younger demographic is my bet.
Rachael, You have taken some very strong opinions here. Thank you for keeping things spicy. What I thought I was going to hear from you, included lots of thoughts about what kind of online database could be created that would help tour managers better access doctors and hospitals as well as late night restaurant and clubs. I am not sure if there is any online platform where touring companies write reviews and talk about their experiences in detail in order to help provide useful tips for other large touring companies, but I feel like it may be a good idea. I realize that platforms such as facebook and trip advisor may be helpful to an extent, but I think the specificity of touring life could lend itself to a need for its own online platform. This could be helpful not only for tour managers to quickly access doctors who work with touring companies quickly and may be able to process out of town insurance claims if an actor gets sick, but also hospitality reviews: who was able to negotiate a group rating with which hotel, etc. It seems to me like there may be an opportunity here for the development of some helpful online platforms (it could even be an APP) that would work to make better everyone's experiences while on the road, and be tailored to the touring lifestyle so that specific details can be included.
ReplyDeleteOh my gosh that is genius, that would be a great app. I can't decide if it would be better as an umbrella app with a social aspect (so people can share information), or a few smaller apps (like one that searches for doctors and insurance while you're on the road is separate from the one where you review your experiences?). Let's Kickstart this thing.
DeleteI think an umbrella app would be better, personally
ReplyDeletePeople like one stop shops.
DeleteOMG BLOGGER JUST DELETED MY COMMENT NOOoooooo :(
ReplyDeleteOkay - lets try this again. Hopefully I remember everything....
ReplyDeleteHello Ladies and gents,
There is one thing in particular that Rachael said that I found to be really pertinent - "mass culture isn’t a thing anymore." After attending the National Arts Marketing Project Conference this weekend, I have to say that this is VERY true. Attendees, stakeholders, and constituents want more than just one option - they want diversity, variety, and uniqueness.
Thus, I think that Jessie's idea about an app is particularly intriguing - however, I think it might be applied better when geared to attendees rather than arts organizations. What if a person in Seattle, WA could download an app about Chicago's Looking Glass Theater's tour of Peter Pan and follow updates as they tour across the country to their city? The app could include insider information like behind the scenes images, fun facts, or interesting aspects of the performance - but also, it could include key information like the address of his/her performance, any dates/cancellations/delays, etc.
In addition, if this app included a section for donations - then money could be made as well. We have all seen the harshness that touring can have for an arts organization. What if some of those elements were showcased in the app and viewed by customers? This emotional connection may entice some people to donate who would not have donated previously.
What are your thoughts? Do you think that arts organizations will ever take this kind of technology this far? I was impressed to see that some perf. arts organizations have already started adopting this sort of technology in their theaters, but no one has quite yet adapted it to mobile....
-Lauren
Thoughts?
First - as one who has managed a small tour - Jessie's app idea is genius!
ReplyDeleteSecond - and slightly off topic - for me one of the most compelling aspects of national touring is also my favorite thing about the Chautauqua movement. It builds a more universal familiarity with the theatrical (or musical) cannon and allows for the development of a common language of culture. If Aunt Dorris in Omaha and little Susie in Seattle can both see War Horse, they now have a shared experience and a common reference. Part of the role of the arts is to create national culture, and this necessitates making the art available to a wide spectrum of the population (both geographically and economically).
I love Kate’s thought of the national culture, and I can’t agree more. It is one of the reasons that I really hope that touring doesn’t fade away. I have loved being able to share different shows with my family in Oklahoma as I have lived in different parts of the country (California, Nevada, and now Pennsylvania).
DeleteAnother note to touring, I have been a part of many small towns in several states, and touring productions were often the only chance of seeing top quality performances. I truly believe they are so important to all of these small towns, including mid-America, for the education of arts.