THEATRES LOSE MONEY.

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 17812, 11 July 1923, Page 11

THEATRES LOSE MONEY.

TROUBLES IN LONDON. The London theatres are facing great difficulties. It is pointed out that the problems of management were ii€ver greater tlian to-day. Competition is keener, costs are immensely higher, and the returns are in no sense greater than before the war. To-day the lot of the London theatre manager is not an easy one. There are so many factors militating against him, of which broadcasting is omy the latest. It is not that one desires to say: "Pity the poor manager!" but if a play fails to attract, it means hardship for many less important people. A London manager, wiuh whom a representative of the "Morning Post" talked on the subject, had a tew outspoken remarks to make. Here are some of his points: —- The price of theatre seats is not higher in most London theatres than betore the war. The imposition of the entertainment tax makes them cost more to the public, but that is not the theatres' fault, nor do they profit by it. In other words, the manager is not getting any greater return for the wares he displays than in 1914, despite the fact that the cost of everything else connected with the theatre has risen. Salaries are higher all round. Rents and production expenses have increased enormously. Printing, advertising, insurance, heating, and lighting all cost more. "What a Play Costs to-day. In the old days a play might run only a hundred rnglits am yet show a respectable profit. To-day, it may run 300 nights and yet not pay. The tneatre manager states that it is costing him £l3llO a week to pay all the expenses connected with the house and cast. He lias then to try to recoup himself for the cost of the production and make a profit on which to live. The fact is that at present only tho theatrical syndicates with large or unlimited capital behind them can hope to succeed in London. The manager whose interest in his theatre is other than purely commercial, the actor-manager, or the producer-manager, for example, i-3 finding it increasingly difficult to compete with adverse circumstances. The manager who adventures his own money in a play has to be absolutely certain of its success, or he will be ruined. To make more than £I3OO a week means that the house must be practically full at every performance, and in these days, when everyone's pocket is so hard hit, it is the pit and gallery that are the easiest to fill, and the returns do not, in the popular theatre phrase, enable the house to "play to gas-money." The rent problem has been discussed ad infinitum, and £450 a week is quite an ordinary rent for the bar© building. The practice of profit-rentals grew up during the war. and theatres are now sub-let again and again, until there are five or six men with a definite managerial interest in the theatre, each drawing a weekly sum of money from it, and making the final lessee pay more and more. New Forms of Competition. Then there are the new competitors with the theatres. Before the war the hotels and restaurants were the theatre's best supporters. You dined at a restaurant and went on to your stall at the theatre, and the hotels arranged special theatre dinners to suit your convenience. Where is the theatre dinner now? It lias given place to the dance dinner. For 12s Cd a man can dine and have three hours' free dancing on a perfect floor and to the accompaniment of a perfect band. He can start dancing between the courses if he likes so to assist or injure his digestion, according to the individual predilection. And by not going to the theatre he saves a couple of taxi-fares. If the hotel proprietor does not provide dancing facilities, he gives a free concert or imports a vaudeville troupe. Now we have broadcasting. The managers have refused to sanction the broadcasting of p'ays, but- there is nothing to prevent a broadcasting company engaging its own company of artists and releasing an opera, if it likes, in wireless waves. When the technical sid? of broadcasting has been perfected who will want to stir out of doors on a wet night to go to the theatre? More Loyalty Needed. There is yet another side of the question. The British public welcomes, quite rightly, the importation of foreign plays. By all means should American and other productions appear here. The trouble is that so many people run madly after any new imported play or player, and sa.y, "Hero* is the real thing! No one in England can do anything like that." Americans never speak like that about an English, play performed by F.nglish p lave re in NewYork. \\e are too fond of lielittling our own talent and material. It is time to desist- from crying "stinking fish'- about the English stage. It is disheartening to everyone connected > with it. There is no alternative for some ot our best actors but to go back to the provinces, where at least they are lo\ed and appreciated. There they always find loyalty.