Fixed show running times may lead to fixed audiences for Broadway

With the rapid disintegration of powerhouse shows on Broadway, theatergoers worry that the industry will spontaneously combust. However, economic theory may prove otherwise.

The idea that limiting supply in the theater industry would lead to a higher demand from audience members is hardly original—if it can work for Prada shoes, why not Broadway shows? “If it’s [a show] only here for a limited time then maybe people will want to make it a priority,” suggested actor Max Pensack, CC ’11. Anyone who followed sales of discount tickets at Columbia’s Ticket and Information Center after the announcement of several show closings cannot argue: a final performance means a huge spike in ticket sales.

But sometimes a theory doesn’t work in practice. Long-running shows stay open for a reason. Michael Banta, production manager of Barnard’s theatre department, believes that, despite the lack of creative growth and development, “If shows were limited to a runtime ... it could be negative for the economy.” Banta, himself an employee of Broadway, believes that “it’s good if they [shows] run for long enough to make the producer’s money back.”

The idea that the theater industry and its producers must evolve to survive is frightening to many, but the world of theater has always been a nexus of growth and regeneration. Vaudeville translated into Broadway. All-male casts made way for actresses.

Yet many Columbia actors remain concerned for the future of their careers. With the growing popularity of movie-musicals, some even question that theater is soon to be obsolete.

Theatre major Rebecca Versaci, BC ’09, remains unfased. “There’s always going to be talk that theatre is on its way out—has been for centuries,” she said. Versaci believes that if theater has survived this long, there should be no worries about its profitable future, as long as it is willing to evolve with the times.

But what happens if the question isn’t whether a show will make a profit, but how much of a profit the show will make? When every penny counts, it’s only sensible that the industry would prioritize economic efficiency. Hypothetically, if an open-ended show runs for two years and makes $400,000 profit, then won’t a show with a planned finite run of two years earn more money because more seats will be sold per show due to a defined supply? Finite show runs might just be the solution to the empty seats and flopping shows of Times Square.

What’s more, the monetary benefit and job security this could hold for many employees in the theater world is also appealing. Actors and the people working behind the scenes may feel reassured by the regular guaranteed paycheck of a finite run. “It’s a nice thing from a stage management point of view to have a steady job,” said Banta. The fact that a salary would be implemented for a set amount of time reduces occupational stress.

Still, an actor—especially a financially successful one—can be torn between his ambition and reality. Actors are sensitive when it comes to their work, but even the most passionate thespian could want to graduate to different roles due to boredom or physical exhaustion.

Some actors attempt to perform even when everyone knows they should call it quits: Christina Applegate injured herself during The Pajama Game, for example. If the phrase “the show must go on” is taken too seriously for too long, actors suffer greatly. Finite show runs could prevent overexertion.

While the removal of a show from the Broadway lineup may disappoint audience members, the old makes way for the new. Actors, writers, and even producers must share the limelight, and while their egos may try get in the way, they are all a part of a business that respects its members tremendously. Finite running times would contribute to this nurturing environment.

Actress Sarah Steele, CC ’11, trusts the process of constant creative evolution on Broadway: “There are so many stories to tell ... I think we need to make space for the new.” As a college student looking to the future of her theatrical career, this is especially resonant. Defined running times would not only keep the theater industry afloat—they would also allow for more creative growth and opportunity on Broadway. In an industry where it is so hard to catch a break, wouldn’t it be nice to make it just a little bit easier?