Stupid Guest Tricks

Long time lurker, first time poster. Hi! :waves:

I'm a House Manager in a university theatre. We have one of our theatres broken out by level, with a price break in the balcony. However, on a fairly empty night with only a handful of patrons in the balcony, I'll quite often just tell everyone with a balcony ticket to go take a seat on our lower level instead. They get an upgrade, the other patrons don't know the difference, and it puts more people closer to the action, which is always better for the performers. Nothing like being onstage and looking out over a sparsely populated theatre; the least I can do is fill in the close spots so it looks a little better.

Now, on a full night? You bet I'm watching like a hawk to make sure people are heading upstairs when they're supposed to be. However, if someone comes to me at intermission and asks to move into empty seats downstairs that they saw, I tell them to go for it.

In some theatres, I can totally understand being strict about staying in the assigned seats. Doesn't make sense for my theatre though, it's not worth the headache to police it.

WELCOME!!!

and I agree, your solution seems to make a lot of sense, in that type of venue!

aixia wrote:Long time lurker, first time poster. Hi! :waves:

I'm a House Manager in a university theatre. We have one of our theatres broken out by level, with a price break in the balcony. However, on a fairly empty night with only a handful of patrons in the balcony, I'll quite often just tell everyone with a balcony ticket to go take a seat on our lower level instead. They get an upgrade, the other patrons don't know the difference, and it puts more people closer to the action, which is always better for the performers. Nothing like being onstage and looking out over a sparsely populated theatre; the least I can do is fill in the close spots so it looks a little better.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm............ what are the price ranges??

Any advice or suggestions to convice my House Manager?? My theater has a different policy.

aixia wrote:Long time lurker, first time poster. Hi! :waves:

I'm a House Manager in a university theatre. We have one of our theatres broken out by level, with a price break in the balcony. However, on a fairly empty night with only a handful of patrons in the balcony, I'll quite often just tell everyone with a balcony ticket to go take a seat on our lower level instead. They get an upgrade, the other patrons don't know the difference, and it puts more people closer to the action, which is always better for the performers. Nothing like being onstage and looking out over a sparsely populated theatre; the least I can do is fill in the close spots so it looks a little better.

Now, on a full night? You bet I'm watching like a hawk to make sure people are heading upstairs when they're supposed to be. However, if someone comes to me at intermission and asks to move into empty seats downstairs that they saw, I tell them to go for it.

In some theatres, I can totally understand being strict about staying in the assigned seats. Doesn't make sense for my theatre though, it's not worth the headache to police it.

That just makes total sense. If you buy a cheaper seat, you're not guarenteed the chance to get an upgrade, but you might. If the house is full you have to keep the seat you have.

DLRFantasmic!Dan wrote:Hmmmmmmmmmmm............ what are the price ranges??

Any advice or suggestions to convice my House Manager?? My theater has a different policy.

Our prices are fairly cheap, we are a university after all. $20 lower level, $12 balcony. It's not a huge price break, so moving people isn't likely to set off an entitlement firestorm from the people who paid more.

As for convincing your House Manager, you're probably best off to ask questions about the policy and the reasonings behind it, then spark a conversation from there. With most of these sorts of rules, the rule comes about because of people abusing laxer policies, so there may be a reason from way back as for why it's done that way. Once you understand the reasons, you can better combat them.

Syndrome wrote:...On the flipside, Mr. Syndrome and my brother went to see "On the Record" in Chicago (only true Disney fans remember that colossal flop). ...

It was considered a flop? Really? I'm surprised. It packed out the theater here in Dallas, and my family and I loved it. Granted, it had pretty limited appeal, mainly to die-hard Mouse fans, but I thought it was great, and the crowd I saw it with seemed to agree. To this date, the soundtrack CD's are among the most listened-to Disney music in both my house and my in-laws.

aixia wrote:Long time lurker, first time poster. Hi! :waves:

....

I like your solution, aixia. My own take is that the people paying higher prices are getting what they paid for as far as their own seats are concerned, and so long as those that move from cheaper seats are not disruptive, it shouldn't be a big deal.

Oh, and to from :wallaby: and !!! :D: :D: :D:

ktulu wrote:When I was younger and attended concerts on a regular basis, my friends and I often upgraded ourselves to better seats. When we got caught and escorted back to the lawn (aka the cheap seats), we'd wait for the next band to start and a group of us would upgrade once again. Ah, good times...

I didn't think that was you at the Rush concert, but Hubby and I both said that you and Jill seemed downright familiar when we met you.... ;)

BRWombat wrote:It was considered a flop? Really? I'm surprised. It packed out the theater here in Dallas, and my family and I loved it. Granted, it had pretty limited appeal, mainly to die-hard Mouse fans, but I thought it was great, and the crowd I saw it with seemed to agree. To this date, the soundtrack CD's are among the most listened-to Disney music in both my house and my in-laws.

In Chicago it didn't sell well at all (hence my nephew's upgrade), but I personally think a lot of it was that it was barely promoted. It only lasted a year from opening till final touring performance...I think it had a lot of potential, but they just didn't support it.

Syndrome wrote:In Chicago it didn't sell well at all (hence my nephew's upgrade), but I personally think a lot of it was that it was barely promoted. It only lasted a year from opening till final touring performance...I think it had a lot of potential, but they just didn't support it.

That's a shame. In any case, I kind of got the impression that it really wasn't designed to be anything with legs -- it's not your typical long-running Broadway fare -- so I wasn't surprised by the one-tour-and-it's-done.

On the positive side, we could say that we saw Ashley Brown in a Disney musical before she became Mary Poppins on Broadway.

Yeah, Mr. Syndrome and my brother really enjoyed it (I was supposed to be there instead of bro but I was sick...ugh). Bro's not even all that into Disney, but he likes plays and Broadway music so it still appealed to him.

We've already got our Mary Poppins tickets for Chicago (good excuse for me to fly out there and briefly see the family too).