tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146056913190816228.post7161340493732301153..comments2023-06-08T09:09:26.663-04:00Comments on THE CHARLEBOIS POST - MONTREAL: After Dark, November 15, 2011Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146056913190816228.post-33781259430184421062011-11-20T14:27:24.588-05:002011-11-20T14:27:24.588-05:00I understand what you're saying about ticket p...I understand what you're saying about ticket prices, and I've given the matter some thought myself over the past months. While charging 40$ a ticket for independent theatre would be nice to be able to do, insofar as it would theoretically help pay the bills, any theatre practitioner in Montreal knows that you can't do that. The public simply won't pay 40$ for a show at a smaller venue, because it's not worth that much in their eyes. <br /> <br />I've been considering recently what the source of greatest competition for theatre is, and I believe it to be cinema. If people are going out of their homes to spend 20-50$ on an evening of entertainment, they are more likely to spend it at a cinema than at live theatre. Quite a lot of that is simply that Hollywood has more money to throw at things like publicity and marketing, but I think there's also a public perception that needs to be addressed. We, as theatre practitioners, know that there is a difference, both in style and in experience, between cinema and live theatre. I wonder, though, how clear that distinction is to our audience. If the audience we're trying to entice sees no practical difference between watching us on a screen, or watching us live, then of course they won't spend more than cinema prices to come see it. <br /><br />The point I'm getting at is that maybe part of the problem is that we need to convince the public of the value of live theatre. People will pay more money for a theatre ticket if they feel it is worth more. I'm not sure how to re-value our art in the public eye, but I'll keep thinking about it, and I would definitely welcome suggestions.Brucehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15675753246452630168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4146056913190816228.post-58251587747562321172011-11-15T10:22:22.541-05:002011-11-15T10:22:22.541-05:00The music industry today is not what it was 20, or...The music industry today is not what it was 20, or even 10 years ago. The volume of recorded music being produced so much larger than it once was, and so speciated into genres and sub-genres that making a living by selling recorded music is next to impossible. In fact, the sales of most albums don't even cover the costs of recording. There is money in touring, but most acts can only hope to break even, and to put on a truly spectacular show, it costs more, so it's not like the difference between a $30 ticket and an $80 ticket is lining the performers pockets. The best way in this day and age for recording artist to earn a real living is by licensing their music. This means allowing their songs to be used in television, movies, and yes, advertising. The only real consumers out there who actually by a decent price for music are the licensing agencies. Before any so-called fan chastises a band for "selling-out" they should first ask themselves "what have I done to help sustain this artist?"Shayne Grynhttp://shaynegryn.comnoreply@blogger.com