It was brought to my attention tonight - not that I didn't already know - that I don't blog enough. I know. I put a lot into big posts like the Mametfesto and Whiney Boys and such, and I have a day job and a boyfriend and plays I'm supposedly writing and stuff. But, there's no reason why I can't post little things more often. I've had this blog for a year and only have 38 posts to my name.
So I will share an anecdote that saddened me a bit, in the hopes that other theaters will refrain from making this mistake.
Big Subscriber Theater calls me. It's a very nice sounding girl who's probably my age or younger, and she wants to know what I thought of the two plays I saw last season at Big Subscriber Theater (hereafter BST). I know she wants to sell me a subscription package, because strangers don't call me to ask what I thought of plays otherwise. I don't do subscription packages, but I figure, what the hell, she probably needs practice refining her shpiel, and I'll be nice, which (if my box office days are any indication) I'm guessing she needs. So I share my opinions, and I listen while she tells me about the following season, and at this point I find a way to let her know I don't buy subscriptions, and she says she's not selling subscriptions.
Oh. OK. Go on, I say. Apparently, she's selling "single ticket packages." That's where you buy a certain number of discounted "blank tickets" ahead of time, and can use them however you want throughout the season - one for one show, three for the next, whatever. And then she says, "Well, you got four tickets to our last season, that must have added up to about three hundred dollars. But with this package, you get those four tickets for just $215."
Now, if BST had enough of my information that this girl was able to call me, they also had the information of how much money I spent on my tickets. And while I don't know the exact amount, I guarantee you it wasn't $300, or even $100. 2 of my tickets were a student ticket deal; 2 were won in their lottery.
I calmly told this girl I wasn't interested, and we parted ways. What I want to know is: why was this girl given this particular pitch for me? Why, when I know that BST must have the ability to generate info about how much each patron spent on tickets, did they give her the "you're saving $85" angle when it didn't apply? They can still call me, if they want, but just find a different line for the cheap shmuck who won half her tickets in your lottery. Or, don't call me, because I have no money and you should know that because I didn't give you very much last time.
It saddens me, because I want theaters to make money, but they'd really be better off asking someone other than me for it. I know, I know, I'm part of the problem of the entitled audience who waits for discounts and never pays full price and that's why theaters aren't making money, but I'm a broke 20-something practitioner, what do you expect? At any rate, calling me was not an efficient use of their time. Perhaps I didn't help that by playing along, but hey, cold calling sucks and I know from experience that a friendly voice, even one that ultimately rejects you, can make the day go faster.
So Big Subscriber Theaters: don't waste your development/ telemarketing/ box office staff's time by giving them crappy leads. I am a prime example of a crappy lead. Don't call me, and if you do, don't tell me that $215 for 4 tickets is an amazing discount. It probably is; I'm just the wrong person to tell that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Of course it saddens you! And you are NOT part of the problem.
ReplyDeleteThis BST didn't take the time to ask you for your ideas as to what would bring you and your 20-something practitioner colleagues into the theatre. You WANT to see their plays and that is the biggest part of their challenge! You are not a crappy lead - you are a real and valuable audience member who took the time to share with them what you thought about their plays. You have friends who would do the same.
It's too bad they didn't know how to talk to you. Or listen to you. That is the part of the problem you take on as your own, and it is not yours. It is theirs.
What saddens me is that this BST doesn't even recognize the problem. Let's hope that they will follow the example of those BSTs who engage their creative, young audiences in conversation and mindstorming about new ways to make theatregoing possible. Everyone would be better for it.
I've told one of the BSTs multiple times per year for the past five years that I am a theatre practitioner with friends who work at said BST and the theatre at large, and that I regularly get free tickets from them during previews. They still call. You'd think somehow they could flag my record with, "This bitch don't need tickets," or at least a "Do not call."
ReplyDeleteAnn - thank you. I somewhat regret not telling this girl why I was declining, but sadly, if my experience in these matters is any indicator, her supervisor probably isn't asking her what she's hearing from the people she calls. I hope I'm wrong.
ReplyDeleteEmily - thanks for starting my day off with a laugh! I'm picturing a "This bitch don't need tickets" button in Raiser's Edge. Someone call the developers. This needs to happen.
I can't deny that, as a playwright, I dream of getting my plays done at these Big Houses. I know how unrealistic such dreams are, but hey, if I weren't dreaming big, I wouldn't be a playwright to begin with.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet, as an audience member, and as an independent theatre producer, I have little patience for the Big Houses. I think that the houses themselves are not just part of the problem, they ARE the problem. Saying this might even make my dreams that much more unrealistic, but so be it. It's not said enough.
Forgetting about the quality of the work at most Big Houses in NYC, which, for every CIRCLE MIRROR TRANSFORMATION (a truly gorgeous play) they produce, they churn out about five wonky, sloppy, tepid shows every season... okay, let's NOT forget about quality, but let's set the matter of quality aside for just a moment...
The Big Houses are monoliths that can only be sustained by subscribers (who, as you rightly point out, are paying through the nose for the privilege of seeing the plays), and wealthy donors (who at least receive fair recognition for paying through the nose), and grant giving organizations (which often dictate in insidious ways the content of the shows produced at the Big Houses; see the issue of Quality above).
And, not to paint too broad a picture, but the kid who calls you, shilling for subscriptions will see a tiny bit of a trickle-down of that monolith cash cow before any actual theatre artists do.
How many plays are in a season? Six? (I don't know, I just made up a number.) Are those six playwrights, those six directors, the designers, and the casts making a yearly living from this one Big House that employs them for one show? Of course not. The artists get paid relatively well for their work, but they are essentially itinerant workers who bounce from gig to gig (I think I first heard theatre artists referred to as itinerants from Mike Daisey,for the record). More arts administrators make a living in this country then do artists themselves. This is a HUGE part of the problem.
Most of the money that Big Houses raise goes to the administrative staff of the House, from the bigwig Artistic Director on down. The kid who calls you for a subscription is obviously only making a pittance of the cash cow, but money is clearly being thrown at the problem to the extent where one arm of the organization doesn't know what the rest of the body is doing.
A staff is, of course, crucial to the daily operations of a theater, and all staff members should be paid appropriately for their jobs, but if the actual artists who are making the shows aren't being sustained, and if the staff is not actively helping initiate new audiences, then what's the point of having a Big House at all? Especially when the Big House gets to call itself a "Non-Profit," which is as big a misnomer in the theatre world as "Independent Oscar-winner" is in the film world.
To the saintly people who give money to theatre companies, I humbly suggest that you look upon the Big Houses as outdated, bureaucratic, money-suckers that keep the system as broken as it is. Don't give them any more of your money.
Instead, support independent theatre producers!
And while we're at it, support independent theatre artists!
Perhaps independent theatre artists should organize to fund raise on a project-by-project basis, and then go to the Big Houses for sponsorship.
Or else, we will continue to deserve the mediocre culture we have inherited from the last generation.
Perhaps independent theatre artists should organize to fund raise on a project-by-project basis, and then go to the Big Houses for sponsorship.
ReplyDeleteWhat's stopping us? I've got a project and half-a-shoestring budget. What's stopping us?