203 replies to this topic

[jonny]

Right, go after more funding instead of looking at how to cut the costs.  Typical government move.  

 

Apart from building upkeep, where does all the money go that we pay for the McPherson?  Are we paying some full-time staff for a building that only hosts 75 shows a year?  That work should be contracted, or handled by other City employees.

 

The operations of the arena, on the other hand, are fully contracted out to RG properties, right?

[VicHockeyFan]

The operations of the arena, on the other hand, are fully contracted out to RG properties, right?

 

Yes.  The City pays nothing towards the arena operations, and they collect a bit from every ticket sale.  But they do own it, so they do not collect property tax.

[jonny]

Yes.  The City pays nothing towards the arena operations, and they collect a bit from every ticket sale.  But they do own it, so they do not collect property tax.

 

Wow, that actually sounds reasonable unlike how we manage the theaters.

 

City council should tender the management of the theaters out to RFEOI and see if there are any interested parties.

[VicHockeyFan]

Wow, that actually sounds reasonable unlike how we manage the theaters.

 

City council should tender the management of the theaters out to RFEOI and see if there are any interested parties.

 

Does the City own them both?

 

Looking at their annual report, they sure do a lousy job on concession sales.

 

https://rmts-assets....S_AGM_Final.pdf

 

$288,000 in sales, and $237,000 in costs.  That report also says they get $450,000 in grants.  How does the City pay $750,000 towards the McPherson?  Does the City employ some of the staff, or does the City do the maintenance for free? 

[Bingo]

2014 was the 100th anniversary of both the Royal Theatre and the McPherson Playhouse.

 

 

 

 

[VicHockeyFan]

The report also says that they employ the equivalent of 37 full-timers, at a cost of $53,000 per.

[jonny]

Does the City own them both?

 

Looking at their annual report, they sure do a lousy job on concession sales.

 

https://rmts-assets....S_AGM_Final.pdf

 

$288,000 in sales, and $237,000 in costs.  That report also says they get $450,000 in grants.  How does the City pay $750,000 towards the McPherson?  Does the City employ some of the staff, or does the City do the maintenance for free? 

 

I have no idea, actually. They are both run by the same non profit. I'm sure there would be a massive bloodletting if they tried to let evil capitalists behind the controls.

[Mr Cook Street]

Since we're subsidizing the theater so much, why not make it cheaper to rent the facility? Make it affordable for more community groups to use it. The staff are already getting paid, the facility needs to be maintained regardless of how often it is used. At the very least, you allow for more concession (liquor sales) to generate revenue. I don't necessarily mind paying $750k, but it should be a public amenity if we are forking out that kind of money.

[Benezet]

http://www.timescolo...house-1.2125968

Everything is relative.


“The Royal and McPherson Theatres Society has a very recent consultant’s report that speaks in detail to the operations of the theatres, the physical condition of the theatres and that kind of thing,” Madoff said, adding: “We already have a report that says this is one of the best-run theatre systems in the country with the lowest amount of subsidy in the country.”

[tedward]

So is anyone going to show why we need both if they sit empty so much?

Edited by tedward, 04 December 2015 - 02:56 PM.

[VicHockeyFan]

So is anyone going to show why we need both if they sit empty so much?

 

This month, they will be in use on the same night 6 times.  In January 2016 just 2 times.

 

I'm not sure anyone wants to do away with it, we just need a way to make it more economical.  I mean how cool would it be if schools could use it more.  It's a pretty awesome space.

[Bingo]

This month, they will be in use on the same night 6 times.  In January 2016 just 2 times.

 

I'm not sure anyone wants to do away with it, we just need a way to make it more economical.  I mean how cool would it be if schools could use it more.  It's a pretty awesome space.

Some schools are getting their own theatres, such as the new Oak Bay High, which will also be used up the community when the school isn't using it.

[VicHockeyFan]

Some schools are getting their own theatres, such as the new Oak Bay High, which will also be used up the community when the school isn't using it.

 

Yes, but most don't, and like I say, the Mac is a pretty cool space.  I mean Blue Bridge left because of the tremendous expense, no other reason.  Someone needs to re-imagine it.  But I presume that will meet with union resistance.

[spanky123]

The report also says that they employ the equivalent of 37 full-timers, at a cost of $53,000 per.

 

The stat that caught me was the one that said that every ticket had to be subsidized $27. I am all for the arts but if there is not enough community support to maintain the theatre on its own merits then the plug needs to be pulled. My guess is that if the City threatened to pull its investment unless McPherson got its act together then a new business plan would be available pronto. The McPherson board knows exactly what needs to be done, they just have no motivation to do it.

[Benezet]

The report also says that they employ the equivalent of 37 full-timers, at a cost of $53,000 per.

Methinks that would probably be the on-call, casually hired people who only work when there's a show, and whose time is billed out.

[VicHockeyFan]

^ yes, for sure.

[Jill]

Counting only the performance nights is inaccurate. The time spent preparing for a performance is also paid for, even if no bums are in the seats.

[Greg]

And there don't need to be performances at both theatres on the same night for a scheduling conflict to exist. When an opera is going on at the Royal for example, then the theatre is unavailable for the entire duration of the run, not just the nights that there is a performance.

 

I also think it is a bit oversimplified to treat the entire subsidy as a loss to the city, and to focus on ticketholders who are not from the City of Victoria as a negative thing. Performances at the Royal and McPherson bring people downtown, and result in extra revenue at other places, such as restaurants. Events like JazzFest bring people from out of province and out of country to the city, and result in a significant influx of revenue for the city, including restaurants and hotels.

 

There is really no point in advocating to make a city "vibrant" while ignoring the fact that arts and cultural events are pretty much the textbook definition of vibrant for many people. In my opinion, the discussion should not be about whether or not we need both the Royal and the McPherson, but simply about how to operationally run them better.

[Benezet]

Counting only the performance nights is inaccurate. The time spent preparing for a performance is also paid for, even if no bums are in the seats.

Not to mention things like film shoots, private functions, and recording sessions. There was apparently two weeks of filming inside the theatres recently, which didn't get a mention from Young.

[VicHockeyFan]

Not to mention things like film shoots, private functions, and recording sessions. There was apparently two weeks of filming inside the theatres recently, which didn't get a mention from Young.

 

Well, I guess even if it's full 365, it's still needing $750,000 per year from the City.  The financials are still wonky.