random strings - broadwayhttps://blog.randomstring.org/2016-07-05T13:09:23-04:00the problem with broadwayhd2016-07-05T13:09:23-04:002016-07-05T13:09:23-04:00-dsr-tag:blog.randomstring.org,2016-07-05:/2016/07/05/the-problem-with-broadwayhd/Broadway, like Hollywood, has a problem. “They” – there are about
forty Broadway theaters, 31 of which are owned by three companies, 3 of
which are run by non-profits – produce an expensive entertainment
service which draws tourists but utterly fails at clearing the potential
market. That is, they could sell a lot more tickets if they could make
it more convenient for people who won’t or can’t travel to
Manhattan.<p>Broadway, like Hollywood, has a problem. “They” – there are about
forty Broadway theaters, 31 of which are owned by three companies, 3 of
which are run by non-profits – produce an expensive entertainment
service which draws tourists but utterly fails at clearing the potential
market. That is, they could sell a lot more tickets if they could make
it more convenient for people who won’t or can’t travel to
Manhattan.</p>
<p>There are a number of options. The classic method is to mount a
touring production, in which actors and props and sets travel from large
city to large city for limited engagements. This is profitable but
amazingly expensive, and while it increases the audience share to those
able to visit those large cities on those particular dates, it’s still
not all that efficient. Another option is to establish a second, third
or fourth site – Chicago, LA and London’s West End are the usual choices
– which helps a little. There is little to distinguish these “Broadway”
shows from local productions, just a big budget and perhaps some of the
original cast.</p>
<p>If a play or musical is unusually successful, it may be turned into a
movie. This requires about the same investment as any other movie, and
moves the whole problem into Hollywood’s domain.</p>
<p>But for the very minor cost of a camera crew and cinematographer, an
actual Broadway performance can be recorded. All media is digital these
days, and so there are several options for distribution:</p>
<ul>
<li>Simulcast (or record, edit and send) to digital movie theaters</li>
<li>Make and sell discs</li>
<li>Streaming video / video on demand services</li>
</ul>
<p>Simulcasting has been tried several times, Interestingly,
London-originated productions are much more open to it than
US-originals. Presumably the extra cost of a trans-Atlantic ticket is
considered a sufficient barrier to entry.</p>
<p>In the last two years, BroadwayHD was formed as a for-profit company
to do NetFlix- style streaming plus special live-streaming events.
They’ve just managed to do two productions: Old Hats, an off-Broadway
revival with the original duo of Bill Irwin and David Shiner, and from
the Roundabout Theater Company, She Loves Me. Notably, both of these
productions had firm (and near) close dates when they were
live-streamed. Broadway is extremely jealous.</p>
<p>The process of actually signing up for, paying and watching a
BroadwayHD stream is horrendously complex. Despite everyone uninstalling
Flash due to the horrendous security problems, the supported browser
viewing method is Flash-based. Officially there is HTML5 video support
on Android and iPhone devices, but that doesn’t really exist – instead
there is a link to an app which has very, very poor ratings. I didn’t
install it.</p>
<p>There is the possibility of going through AppleTV or Roku. We tried
Roku, and it worked – but it only worked after we subscribed for a year
of service. The one-month option did not work, and the one-showing
option did not work. I think BroadwayHD is currently charging us for all
three, however.</p>
<p>So: video quality: high. Audio quality: acceptably good. Cost: awful,
until you think of it as being the cost of one Broadway ticket split
among the four of us, with no trip to NYC required. Then it becomes more
bearable. User experience: very bad.</p>
<p>Hopefully that will improve. Hopefully the number of shows available
will improve, as well – it’s currently very very very low. One, really,
plus a lot of filler content.</p>