Quick Q&A: Ken Davenport

Producer Ken Davenport, who authors the blog The Producer’s Perspective, is passionate about the theatre business and about new media.

What made you start blogging?

As my office staff will tell you, I spout things constantly and I got the feeling one day that they were all tired of hearing it. But I still needed to purge this stuff. On the producers’ side of this industry there’s been a feeling that it’s so awful how far behind we are in technology, but no one was talking about it in a public forum. I wanted to do that to see if people agree and if change will happen, over time. I think I’m the only commercial theatre producer blogging.

Why do you think that is?

On the web there isn’t a lot of community spirit. It’s strange: I love the theatre because it’s a small business, the same group of people doing it and everyone knows everybody. Sort of like high school. But at the same time it’s all very competitive – hard to get everyone on the same page.

Have you gotten feedback about the blog from other commercial producers?

A very successful commercial producer told me he didn’t think I should be doing it. I asked why and he said he doesn’t reveal his business. I understand that, but that’s not business in 2010. I think there’s more to be gained than to lose. I wrote on my blog about assembling a Twitter army – finding out who’s talking about your show on Twitter and then following them and creating a one-on-one communication. A very simple thing. Is it better that I’m the only one who knows that? Probably it’s better for me, but it’s not better for the industry as a whole. I’m a lifer. I want more people promoting theatre so that I have customers in the future.

What is the biggest challenge right now for a commercial producer?

The biggest challenge we have is that we’re not allowed to communicate with our customers on a daily basis. All of our tickets are sold through a third party and we have no control over that customer information. In fact in our business it’s not only that we don’t have access to the information, but that it’s sold back to us as an email list. Altar Boyz recently paid $20,000 to email “Telecharge subscribers”. We helped build that list up, especially someone like me who does six to eight shows contributing to that list for a long time. We can’t speak to our customers without paying to do so.

In one of your more forward-thinking blog posts you talked about having an advertising person in house. Do you think that is the way the industry will go?

I do think it’s going to go that way frankly because I am going to do it. My goal is to be the first producer who has someone sitting right next to me advertising my show for me. If I’m paying $500,000 to SpotCo or Serino-Coyne every year, why can’t I get one of their account reps at $150,000 a year dedicated to me five days a week? Four years ago, all the nominees for Best Musical were represented by the same advertising company. There’s no other industry that would ever allow that to happen.

photo: Robert J. Saferstein

Do you feel that new media is affecting the influence of critics?

As new media gains power the old loses it. The power of the critics is waning every day. It used to be that a rave in The Times would immediately infuse cash into your box office that would get you over the next month or so. With a good show, those people would tell more people and so on. Nowadays that’s not happening. By the time critics’ word gets out, a lot of people have already decided whether they want to see it or not. Word of mouth, good or bad, happens much faster now because of blogs and email and all that. Right now, as far as newspapers go, critics have power for plays. Without a doubt the New York Times can sell tickets to the right play. But take Blithe Spirit for example. It got a mixed review, but great for Angela Lansbury, in the Times. People are going to see that show not because it got great reviews. The show was somewhat review-proof because of the packaging, and we were able to get the word out about it faster than we could have in the old days.

Why do you think 13 wasn’t a hit?

I knew that was going to be a tough sell, which was one of the reasons I jumped on board. It was similar to Altar Boys in that the title would turn some people away. If I had gotten involved a lot earlier than I did, I would have been a proponent of a title change. I also think that in marketing it, we were using images of teenagers to get adults to buy a ticket – that’s a challenging thing to do. The only times I’ve seen that succeed have been with a “Wonder Years” approach of looking back.

Also, in this economy no one’s been hit harder than the family of four from New Jersey. They weren’t coming in to see two or three shows last Fall, they were coming in to see one. So Mom would ask herself not only what the kids would enjoy but what she would too. And then she bought tickets to Billy Elliot because that looks like it straddles the fence. I don’t think we marketed 13 in a way that straddled the fence.

Speaking of that proverbial family of four from New Jersey, how can they be enticed to the theatre more often?

I know a lot of people would say that lowering the price will get the families back, but I actually don’t believe in that philosophy for a couple of reasons. One – we can’t handle that much cheaper until the industry and the rest of our partners change the economic infrastructure. It’s not like people are making money hand over fist here. Two – nowadays there are many many discount opportunities for families all over the Internet. The number one thing that drives any market is product. The right product will get anyone out and frankly the right product will get anyone out to pay any price. Obviously I thought 13 was a very good show but the timing of it was atrocious. It hit just when everybody was going back into their caves.

photo: Joan Marcus

When you say that the economic infrastructure needs to change, what comes to your mind? Unions?

Everything. The circumstances that put our country into the economic firestorm that we’re in now trickle down to every single industry and Broadway is one of them. There is fat everywhere. I think we need to build budgets based on what the market is bearing, not based on a wing and a prayer. I’ve seen many budgets that will only work if the show is a smash. We have to start looking at the success rate in our industry. Paying someone x amount just because they got it the last ten times….well, if the last ten shows lost money, maybe we should take a look at that. If the show makes money they deserve to get paid and then some.

You recently organized theatre bloggers to form the ITBA. For what purpose?

The purpose is two-fold. It’s to amplify the conversation about theatre. If we can get together and inspire each other to write more often about theatre, the more people will read it, the more people will hear the message, and the more people will come and see it and guarantee its success in the future. Also, I organized the ITBA to put an emphasis on new media. The scales are tipping from old to new, and I want our industry to recognize it.

Which of your shows would you most characterize as a labor of love?

The truth is I don’t do a show unless I love it. This business is too hard to dive into something without loving what you’re doing. I wish I could work on a product I didn’t love, I’d be an investment banker. Unfortunately all my shows are labors of love.