Guest Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 I am sorry to have spoilt people's mornings by posting this article. I wonder what the best course of action would be: a total boycott - I couldn't do it!!! Possibly a combination of cancelling 'friends' membership (which I did ages ago) and buying even more tickets than before just to thwart their strategy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, Darlex said: I am sorry to have spoilt people's mornings by posting this article. I wonder what the best course of action would be: a total boycott - I couldn't do it!!! Possibly a combination of cancelling 'friends' membership (which I did ages ago) and buying even more tickets than before just to thwart their strategy! Thank you very much for posting it, Darlex. It was eye-openingly informative!! I'm already buying fewer tickets, partly because of my own financial situation but also because of the rising prices. So unfortunately I'm one of the statistics the ROH is pleased with. 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxDaveM Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 13 minutes ago, bridiem said: I'm already buying fewer tickets, partly because of my own financial situation but also because of the rising prices. So unfortunately I'm one of the statistics the ROH is pleased with. sadly, a ditto from me Still, I had a fun 14 years, and had the pleasure of seeing Yasmine Naghdi blossom from Artist of the company, into my favourite Principal since Miyako Yoshida 🙂 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob S Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 Don’t these people realise all their problems can be solved by rebranding themselves as Royal Opera House & Partners!? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mallinson Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 The matter was raised in the Ballet Association interview with Kevin O'Hare in April. (About 2/3 of the way down the lengthy report.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sim Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 Oh, and another reason we are not worthy is, despite the thousands of pounds we spend on tickets, that's not enough to satisfy them. We are being penalised because our donations are paltry. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard LH Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, zxDaveM said: by putting off regulars who know the prices from year to year, it makes 'affordable' tickets available for newbies, who may view the increased ticket price as a bargain still Sorry Dave perhaps I am beiing a bit dense but I still don't understand the logic....how would a potential "newbie" who was not previously tempted to buy a ticket at say £25 be encouraged to buy one at say £30? Surely it is the other way around - i.e. it is the committed regulars, rather than newbies, who are more likely to pay the extra. Going back to price elasticity of demand (from my A-level economics) I would have thought newbies would be more price elastic than committed ballet lovers. Edited October 5, 2018 by Richard LH Sp. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninamargaret Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 Sadly, it seems to me that most of the large arts organisations are only interested in corporate or very wealthy donors. They pay lip service to supporters at the lower end - e.g. lowest level of Friends, but basically they're just there for window dressing. An informed and knowledgeable audience was once cherished and welcomed, but no longer it seems. Wonder what performers feel about it? 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxDaveM Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 7 minutes ago, Richard LH said: Sorry Dave perhaps I am beiing a bit dense but I still don't understand the logic....how would a potential "newbie" who was not previously tempted to buy a ticket at say £25 be encouraged to buy one at say £30? Surely it is the other way around - i.e. it is the committed regulars, rather than newbies, who are more likely to pay the extra. Going back to price elasticity of demand (from my A-level economics) I woudl have thought newbies would be more price elastic than committed ballet lovers. what I meant was that if regulars put off buying a £25 ticket (because it used to be £18-20), then it becomes available for a newbie at £25 (or even £30) to buy, as its perhaps not snapped up immediately by said regulars when booking opens. If that makes sense 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 (edited) The ROH seems to have the following active charities: 2117 ROYAL OPERA HOUSE COVENT GARDEN FOUNDATION Registered 200002 THE ROYAL OPERA HOUSE BENEVOLENT FUND Registered 1089928 THE ROYAL OPERA HOUSE ENDOWMENT FUND 2000 Registered A charity must be for the public benefit. I guess that the ROH no longer considers most of us regulars as qualifying! Mayerling hasn't sold all that well and people on here are propping up the audience because they want to see ALL the casts. I've now read the article more thoroughly. So they "increased revenue by £400,000 in six months". This is pure 'marketing speak'. They could save twice that much by being less extravagant in the way they stage operas and, e.g., works by Wayne McGregor. Edited October 5, 2018 by capybara 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 19 minutes ago, zxDaveM said: what I meant was that if regulars put off buying a £25 ticket (because it used to be £18-20), then it becomes available for a newbie at £25 (or even £30) to buy, as its perhaps not snapped up immediately by said regulars when booking opens. If that makes sense But also, if they're giving more emphasis to different marketing streams and reaching people who would never have even considered going to ballet/opera before, they might think 'only £30!'. Which is basically tricking them. I'm all in favour of newcomers to the ROH; but not by putting ticket prices UP!! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizbie1 Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 I'd be interested to know what they classify as a too-frequent attender: do they mean those who are there most nights, or weekly, or just monthly? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard LH Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 13 minutes ago, zxDaveM said: what I meant was that if regulars put off buying a £25 ticket (because it used to be £18-20), then it becomes available for a newbie at £25 (or even £30) to buy, as its perhaps not snapped up immediately by said regulars when booking opens. If that makes sense Dave I see what you mean ....the assumption is that newbies are put off because by the time they are likely to express an interest, most of the cheaper seats have been snapped up by regulars. If that is actually what happens at the moment, I sort of get what the ROH may be trying to achieve - they may be trying to correct a perceived unfairness - although if so this has been badly/insensitively explained in the offending article. I wonder, also, if trying to expand the core audience is somehow l requirement of the level of grant funding - but I really don't know how these things work. This needs thinking about...maybe I was a little too quick to judge... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 4 minutes ago, Richard LH said: I wonder, also, if trying to expand the core audience is somehow l requirement of the level of grant funding - but I really don't know how these things work. Reaching 'new audiences' certainly ticks funding boxes. And that's fair enough. But this can be achieved in other ways (e.g. by special initiatives, which they have). There is no need to 'discard' the regulars. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard LH Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 (edited) 16 minutes ago, bridiem said: But also, if they're giving more emphasis to different marketing streams and reaching people who would never have even considered going to ballet/opera before, they might think 'only £30!'. Which is basically tricking them. Why is this tricking them bridiem? From what Dave suggests above, the assumption may that although a £18-20 (say) ticket technically would have been available before, by the time a newbie would tend to look for a ticket, most of those were snapped up by regulars in the know, and the choice would be limited to (say) £40 plus. The logic (as far as it goes) may be that by pricing such seats at (say) £25- £30 instead, a larger pool of those tickets would stay available longer, allowing more newbies to get "affordable" tickets later in the booking process. Whether that works, or is fair, needs to be thought about a bit more, perhaps. Edited October 5, 2018 by Richard LH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 26 minutes ago, Sim said: Oh, and another reason we are not worthy is, despite the thousands of pounds we spend on tickets, that's not enough to satisfy them. We are being penalised because our donations are paltry. Or non-existent Therein, I fear, lies the rub - or much of it. Actually, the more I think about this, the more I suspect that the Powers That Be who demand increased accessibility and new audiences in exchange for funding are really to blame here. Didn't the ROH, a few years ago, trumpet that more than 50% of its annual audience was made up of newcomers? If so, how can that be sustainable, especially given that it has probably one of the most committed audiences around making up a significant proportion of the rest? Do they then get penalised if the percentages drop, perhaps? I said at the time that surely such high percentages weren't such a good thing, because they must imply that the newcomers largely weren't booking subsequent visits, which of course is the point of the whole thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxDaveM Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 20 minutes ago, bridiem said: I'm all in favour of newcomers to the ROH; but not by putting ticket prices UP!! perhaps they are now aiming at those people who will only ever go to anything if its expensive enough (to keep out the riff-raff!) that don't really care what it is they are going to... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, Richard LH said: Why is this tricking them bridiem? From what Dave suggests above, the assumption may that although a £18-20 (say) ticket technically would have been available before, by the time a newbie would tend to look for a ticket, most of those were snapped up by regulars in the know, and the choice would be limited to (say) £40 plus. The logic (as far as it goes) may be that by pricing such seats at (say) £25- £30 instead, a larger pool of those tickets would stay available longer, attracting more newbies later in the booking process. Whether that works, or is fair, needs to be thought about a bit more, perhaps. Well, in that case it clearly worked: I'd never seen so many side amphi seats still available on public booking as for autumn booking this year. Clearly the regular Friends had been going "you expect me to pay £29 for a seat I paid [?£17] for a year ago? And for one with such a poor view? You must be joking!" But the poor mugs aka newcomers who didn't know that might think they were a bargain - before they sat in them! - given that we all know you can barely get a ticket at the ROH for under three figures, don't we? Does "conning" sound any better than "tricking"? Maybe not. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fonty Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 (edited) “We need to accept the difficult reality that making more tickets available to new audiences sometimes means that the frequency of attendance of regular customers might need to reduce." 😲 Hah!" So, let me see if I have got this right. The ROH only has a certain number of seats, they can't fit any more in. So, they need to raise prices all round. They are saying that there are a large number of regulars who clutter up the place, but always go in the cheapest seats. So shove those prices up, the old regulars will disappear, and a new audience will arrive who won't remember "the good old days" and think they are getting value for money at the new, increased, "cheap" seat price, yes? But have they taken into account that face that the regulars often buy the cheapest seats for multiple casts of the same ballet. So they are probably going to be spending just as much overall, as someone who buys one hugely expensive ticket in the stalls for one performance. How many newcomers are going to do that? Why do I get the feeling that all this Open Up policy is aimed squarely at the corporate market, who they hope will buy blocks of expensive tickets, and wine and dine in the restaurants. And might, if they feel like it, pop in and see a bit of dance or listen to a bit of singing? Edited October 5, 2018 by Fonty 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 5 minutes ago, Richard LH said: Why is this tricking them bridiem? From what Dave suggests above, the assumption may that although a £18-20 (say) ticket technically would have been available before, by the time a newbie would tend to look for a ticket, most of those were snapped up by regulars in the know, and the choice would be limited to (say) £40 plus. The logic (as far as it goes) may be that by pricing such seats at (say) £25- £30 instead, a larger pool of those tickets would stay available longer, allowing more newbies to get "affordable" tickets later in the booking process. Whether that works, or is fair, needs to be thought about a bit more, perhaps. It's tricking them because it's offering them the same seat/s at a higher price than before whilst implying in their marketing that it's some sort of bargain. I would support having a bigger pool of tickets at the lower prices, with enough kept back after Friends' booking, so that both regulars and newcomers are not priced out. (Though even when Friends booking opens, there are currently very few tickets at what I consider to be affordable prices, unless you can stand, which I can't, or are willing to sit in the Slips and see very little, which I'm not. So I don't think even regulars are well served at the moment.) I don't support simply raising ticket prices endlessly, for either regulars or newcomers. If that means (for example) a slightly less lavish new Swan Lake, so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 Like other people, I'd be interested to know what and where the reduced prices are: has anyone spotted them? I'm guessing on the larger swathes of seats which prove more difficult to sell (orchestra stalls, perhaps?), rather than the smaller blocks of seating. If so, I'm wondering if this is a deliberate reversal of the policy announced, I think, a few years ago, of keeping the "cheap" seats cheaper by adding a bit more to the top prices? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninamargaret Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 I find it interesting that it seems that many Friends at the more exalted levels seem to grab the cheaper seats as soon as,booking for their level opens. I've frequently found that I can only get the more expensive, or very poor seats when Friends booking opens. The same complaint was made by a member of the audience I was speaking to last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fonty Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 11 minutes ago, alison said: Like other people, I'd be interested to know what and where the reduced prices are: has anyone spotted them? I'm guessing on the larger swathes of seats which prove more difficult to sell (orchestra stalls, perhaps?), rather than the smaller blocks of seating. Alison, as someone who used to buy seats in the orchestra stalls on a regular basis not that long ago, I can assure you that the decent ones have certainly not been reduced. They might not have put the prices up for the ones with lousy sight lines, which might give the impression they are cheaper in comparison, but I never bought those anyway. Now I go for the "cheaper" seats in the amphitheatre, but I am wondering how much longer I will be able to afford those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizbie1 Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 1 minute ago, ninamargaret said: I find it interesting that it seems that many Friends at the more exalted levels seem to grab the cheaper seats as soon as,booking for their level opens. I've frequently found that I can only get the more expensive, or very poor seats when Friends booking opens. The same complaint was made by a member of the audience I was speaking to last night. Just as I calculate that my bog-standard Friends membership pays for itself in better value tickets over my ~15 performances a year, so I suppose would a higher level subscription make sense financially if I were to attend more frequently still. Friend+ membership is £182 rather than £103, which is not a huge jump. The difference is rather bigger thereafter, but if I went, say, twice a week, the £435 Supporting Friend membership would probably pay off. I don't think it's ideal, but it isn't as simple as rich people snapping up the bargains before the poor can get to them: my attitude to my membership is that it's a bit like paying upfront for a discount card - it's to help my budget stretch further in the long run. I'd prefer to be buying subscription packages, but the ROH ones don't extend to the cheaper seats - which is clearly deliberate, going by today's revelations. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard LH Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 29 minutes ago, bridiem said: It's tricking them because it's offering them the same seat/s at a higher price than before whilst implying in their marketing that it's some sort of bargain. But I suppose if the "timing of purchases" logic is correct (and I don't know if it is) the response would be that by pricing those seats higher, they stay available longer for the benefit of the more casual/occasional customer. The "bargain" for the latter, on that logic, would be that although the price is higher than before, this has enabled them to have a better choice of relatively "cheaper" seats over a longer period. 42 minutes ago, bridiem said: I would support having a bigger pool of tickets at the lower prices, with enough kept back after Friends' booking, so that both regulars and newcomers are not priced out. In an ideal world of course we would all like lower ticket prices, but I am not sure that I would like to see more tickets held back until after Friends' booking. There has to be a benefit for paying to be a Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 15 minutes ago, Lizbie1 said: I don't think it's ideal, but it isn't as simple as rich people snapping up the bargains before the poor can get to them: my attitude to my membership is that it's a bit like paying upfront for a discount card - it's to help my budget stretch further in the long run. I'd prefer to be buying subscription packages, but the ROH ones don't extend to the cheaper seats - which is clearly deliberate, going by today's revelations. Quite. I believe several higher-level Friends have admitted to paying all that money just so they can more or less get their pick of the "cheap" tickets. And to be fair, I've always thought that the ROH restricted the subscriptions to those areas of the auditorium where there are a good number of same-priced seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophoife Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 58 minutes ago, zxDaveM said: perhaps they are now aiming at those people who will only ever go to anything if its expensive enough (to keep out the riff-raff!) that don't really care what it is they are going to... LOL that reminds me of the young couple I saw last year at second interval of Mayerling (Watson/Osipova) who were madly trying to sell their tickets (for the last act!) as they had a dinner reservation. The man they were trying to sell to was Ralph Fiennes. He has a beautiful smile. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard LH Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 20 minutes ago, Lizbie1 said: I'd prefer to be buying subscription packages, but the ROH ones don't extend to the cheaper seats - which is clearly deliberate, going by today's revelations. But discount packages are available for the "relatively cheaper" amphi seats, and Friends get a good opportunity to buy these in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizbie1 Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 Just now, Richard LH said: But discount packages are available for the "relatively cheaper" amphi seats, and Friends get a good opportunity to buy these in advance. I think that depends on your definition. The cheapest available subscription band for Don Quixote, for example, is £33 full price, whereas my customary choice for ballet is two bands lower at £19 (and there are another two bands below that). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SylviaLiu Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 So shocked to read this. I follow the RB closely although not even residing in England, and almost always attend an RB performance every time I find myself in London. At the same time I work in data analytics research. It's quite sad that these data analytics consulting firms (including the people I know of) understand very little beyond numbers, and naively do whatever it does to maximise the target function, while in this case, revenue for the ROH. It's also really pathetic that this article's tone is purely positive and optimistic, as if this is the future and what every art institution should do. Out of curiosity I checked their client lists on their website - many big names are up there. Birmingham Hippodrome, the Met.. the list goes on. The last thing the ROH and other art institutions want, is to be viewed as elitist, and this "strategic price increase" is doing exactly that. Translating to plain English: "you don't have enough money to buy the expensive tickets and/or make donation, you therefore don't deserve to attend many operas and ballets". The right way to develop new audiences and keep the art form alive is by making it more affordable, more reachable. I thought the cinema streaming and the BP big screen streamings were wonderful examples, but this article now makes me have second thoughts ... 16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 38 minutes ago, Richard LH said: But I suppose if the "timing of purchases" logic is correct (and I don't know if it is) the response would be that by pricing those seats higher, they stay available longer for the benefit of the more casual/occasional customer. The "bargain" for the latter, on that logic, would be that although the price is higher than before, this has enabled them to have a better choice of relatively "cheaper" seats over a longer period. In an ideal world of course we would all like lower ticket prices, but I am not sure that I would like to see more tickets held back until after Friends' booking. There has to be a benefit for paying to be a Friend. Yes; but that's not a kind of 'logic' I would support. I didn't mean more tickets held back on the current numbers/percentages. I meant more all round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Wall Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 I wonder if the Ballet Association or London Ballet Circle might arrange a session with Lucy Sinclair from the ROH and the editor responsible for this article in Arts Professional. I would suggest a ROH In-Sight session but I can't imagine that would be forthcoming. It would certainly be interesting to see what kind of turn-out attended. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sim Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 1 hour ago, Bruce Wall said: I wonder if the Ballet Association or London Ballet Circle might arrange a session with Lucy Sinclair from the ROH and the editor responsible for this article in Arts Professional. I would suggest a ROH In-Sight session but I can't imagine that would be forthcoming. It would certainly be interesting to see what kind of turn-out attended. Probably just the old riff raff who love ballet. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now