NYTimes. The Met Opera’s Musicians, Unpaid Since April, Are Struggling
- sf105
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
Depressing. Not sure if orchestras in other countries are doing quite so badly.
<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/15/arts ... demic.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/15/arts/music/metropolitan-opera-pandemic.html</LINK_TEXT>
<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/15/arts ... demic.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/15/arts/music/metropolitan-opera-pandemic.html</LINK_TEXT>
- Burgerbob
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Apr 23, 2018
What the Met is doing is pretty reprehensible. They are the richest orchestra organization perhaps in the world- there's basically no excuse for this.
- CalgaryTbone
- Posts: 1460
- Joined: May 10, 2018
Especially since the CEO and other senior management are still drawing their salaries! How much is there to manage when there are no productions being presented?
Jim Scott
Jim Scott
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
It's disgusting. How many more times will musicians be treated like unskilled servants ? These are people of vast talent, skill and commitment treated more than shabbily.
Chris
Chris
- Bach5G
- Posts: 2874
- Joined: Apr 07, 2018
[quote="CalgaryTbone"]Especially since the CEO and other senior management are still drawing their salaries! How much is there to manage when there are no productions being presented?
Jim Scott[/quote]
Outrageous. I envision the CEO and senior management taken in tumbrels to Times Square and all that that implies. Maybe a little extreme but there you are.
Jim Scott[/quote]
Outrageous. I envision the CEO and senior management taken in tumbrels to Times Square and all that that implies. Maybe a little extreme but there you are.
- Posaunus
- Posts: 5018
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="Bach5G"]Outrageous. I envision the CEO and senior management taken in tumbrels to Times Square and all that that implies. Maybe a little extreme but there you are.[/quote]
Tumbrels! Nice image. Can't wait for the news video! :horror:
Aux armes, citoyens !
Tumbrels! Nice image. Can't wait for the news video! :horror:
Aux armes, citoyens !
- u_2bobone
- Posts: 474
- Joined: Mar 25, 2018
When I was a member of the National Symphony Orchestra, a staff member was heard saying, " You know, if it weren't for the salaries of the musicians, we wouldn't HAVE a deficit" ! True story --------------
- CalgaryTbone
- Posts: 1460
- Joined: May 10, 2018
I was told a story by a friend in another orchestra about one of his previous jobs. The musicians were locked out by the management, and the management tried to send a staff member to a school where the orchestra had been scheduled to play for the kids. He showed up with a boom box and some CD's - the Principal of the school escorted him out of the building. They often forget how important LIVE musicians are to an organization that supposedly presents LIVE music!
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
If ticket sales only needed to cover the musicians' salaries, it would be fine. But if tickets need to cover the much higher salaries of administration staff, plus building operation costs, paying clerks/janitors/ushers, advertising, paying for insurance and whatever medical contingencies are needed for concerts...
There is no way the measly ticket fee pays for that -- there are usually only a few concerts or events in a week.
It is a shame about what is happening to these musicians, and the directors need to take a pay cut. But it is also unreasonable to figure that building costs, taxes (on PRIME real estate!), insurance costs, etc just disappear if there are no concerts. It's quite the opposite of that. I don't know if the Met owns and operates their hall, but that would be important information.
It's a business with no viable product or income stream that still has essentially equal operation costs whether there are concerts or not. Has the Met produced any product, like a recording or video (following safe procedures) to create any sort of income?
There is no way the measly ticket fee pays for that -- there are usually only a few concerts or events in a week.
It is a shame about what is happening to these musicians, and the directors need to take a pay cut. But it is also unreasonable to figure that building costs, taxes (on PRIME real estate!), insurance costs, etc just disappear if there are no concerts. It's quite the opposite of that. I don't know if the Met owns and operates their hall, but that would be important information.
It's a business with no viable product or income stream that still has essentially equal operation costs whether there are concerts or not. Has the Met produced any product, like a recording or video (following safe procedures) to create any sort of income?
- Burgerbob
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Apr 23, 2018
[quote="harrisonreed"]If ticket sales only needed to cover the musicians' salaries, it would be fine. But if tickets need to cover the much higher salaries of administration staff, plus building operation costs, paying clerks/janitors/ushers, advertising, paying for insurance and whatever medical contingencies are needed for concerts...
There is no way the measly ticket fee pays for that -- there are usually only a few concerts or events in a week.
It is a shame about what is happening to these musicians, and the directors need to take a pay cut. But it is also unreasonable to figure that building costs, taxes (on PRIME real estate!), insurance costs, etc just disappear if there are no concerts. It's quite the opposite of that. I don't know if the Met owns and operates their hall, but that would be important information.
It's a business with no viable product or income stream that still has essentially equal operation costs whether there are concerts or not. Has the Met produced any product, like a recording or video (following safe procedures) to create any sort of income?[/quote]
Most other major orchestras are still paying their musicians, usually with a cut. And none of them have as large of an endowment as the Met does.
I know you want to be the devil's advocate here, but there really isn't a good reason for this to be happening with this orchestra.
There is no way the measly ticket fee pays for that -- there are usually only a few concerts or events in a week.
It is a shame about what is happening to these musicians, and the directors need to take a pay cut. But it is also unreasonable to figure that building costs, taxes (on PRIME real estate!), insurance costs, etc just disappear if there are no concerts. It's quite the opposite of that. I don't know if the Met owns and operates their hall, but that would be important information.
It's a business with no viable product or income stream that still has essentially equal operation costs whether there are concerts or not. Has the Met produced any product, like a recording or video (following safe procedures) to create any sort of income?[/quote]
Most other major orchestras are still paying their musicians, usually with a cut. And none of them have as large of an endowment as the Met does.
I know you want to be the devil's advocate here, but there really isn't a good reason for this to be happening with this orchestra.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
Are they just paying the other salaries out of cash reserves? Or is sponsored seat money going to the CEO?
It would be a crime (ethically) for sponsored chair money to line a CEOs pocket
It would be a crime (ethically) for sponsored chair money to line a CEOs pocket
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
[quote="2bobone"]When I was a member of the National Symphony Orchestra, a staff member was heard saying, " You know, if it weren't for the salaries of the musicians, we wouldn't HAVE a deficit" ! True story --------------[/quote]
Gee. If it wasn't for the cost of goods sold, we'd make a nice profit! :tongue:
Seriously, if arts organizations tried to cover all costs with ticket sales, nobody would be able to afford the concerts. I'd certainly balk at paying $250 for a balcony seat at the Met Opera -- no matter how good they are! And I doubt the performers and staff would work at sub-minimum wage to keep the ticket costs down either.
Gee. If it wasn't for the cost of goods sold, we'd make a nice profit! :tongue:
Seriously, if arts organizations tried to cover all costs with ticket sales, nobody would be able to afford the concerts. I'd certainly balk at paying $250 for a balcony seat at the Met Opera -- no matter how good they are! And I doubt the performers and staff would work at sub-minimum wage to keep the ticket costs down either.
- Burgerbob
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Apr 23, 2018
[quote="harrisonreed"]Are they just paying the other salaries out of cash reserves? Or is sponsored seat money going to the CEO?
It would be a crime (ethically) for sponsored chair money to line a CEOs pocket[/quote]
Endowments, donations, etc.
It would be a crime (ethically) for sponsored chair money to line a CEOs pocket[/quote]
Endowments, donations, etc.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
[quote="BGuttman"]<QUOTE author="2bobone" post_id="143631" time="1615936066" user_id="185">
When I was a member of the National Symphony Orchestra, a staff member was heard saying, " You know, if it weren't for the salaries of the musicians, we wouldn't HAVE a deficit" ! True story --------------[/quote]
Gee. If it wasn't for the cost of goods sold, we'd make a nice profit! :tongue:
Seriously, if arts organizations tried to cover all costs with ticket sales, nobody would be able to afford the concerts. I'd certainly balk at paying $250 for a balcony seat at the Met Opera -- no matter how good they are! And I doubt the performers and staff would work at sub-minimum wage to keep the ticket costs down either.
</QUOTE>
That was my point. It's a bad business model from the get go. Once a crazy monkey wrench gets thrown in, you see the deep cracks.
When I was a member of the National Symphony Orchestra, a staff member was heard saying, " You know, if it weren't for the salaries of the musicians, we wouldn't HAVE a deficit" ! True story --------------[/quote]
Gee. If it wasn't for the cost of goods sold, we'd make a nice profit! :tongue:
Seriously, if arts organizations tried to cover all costs with ticket sales, nobody would be able to afford the concerts. I'd certainly balk at paying $250 for a balcony seat at the Met Opera -- no matter how good they are! And I doubt the performers and staff would work at sub-minimum wage to keep the ticket costs down either.
</QUOTE>
That was my point. It's a bad business model from the get go. Once a crazy monkey wrench gets thrown in, you see the deep cracks.
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
Arts organizations in other countries get government subsidies. If European countries did not make massive supports to their symphonies, operas, ballets, museums, etc. they would all fold. For that matter, the Military depends on Government support for music as well. You think the local General wants to pay for a band instead of ditch diggers?
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
[quote="BGuttman"]Arts organizations in other countries get government subsidies. If European countries did not make massive supports to their symphonies, operas, ballets, museums, etc. they would all fold. For that matter, the Military depends on Government support for music as well. You think the local General wants to pay for a band instead of ditch diggers?[/quote]
(This is just my opinion and experience -- I am not writing authoritatively about military bands)
Usually the general is the biggest supporter of the band on a given post. They are the reason more bands haven't been cut. When the cuts were proposed, no general officer wanted to give up their band. The ones that are gone essentially did not fall directly under a major command or high ranking general. Places like Fort Bragg, where the band was playing on a parade field in front of the commanding general and his officers every day were defended by those same officers.
The comparison is apples to oranges -- Army Bands don't exist to make a profit (aren't allowed to charge, for that matter), and don't really exist for the American public's entertainment. The primary mission is always ceremonial and troop support. COMREL is where the public sees military bands, but it is just a small slice of the mission set. Places like Korea and Germany are different. The commanding general usually wants their band out in front of host nation audiences as often as possible, to build as much good press and create opportunities for command messaging in areas that have a US Military presence that might not be hugely popular. Funds are going to put an American soldier in front of host nation civilians, interact with them, and have a conversation that involves community leaders cooperating with the US military in front of their citizens. Used effectively, the dividends are huge.
The army bands have a different problem where we aren't allowed to charge tickets. So we have trouble playing in good halls. Imagine a decent municipal hall being approached by an army band for a concert engagement with the stipulation that tickets must be free. Even for the finest military bands around, that's a tough sell. I think this point is related to the OP -- halls are not cheap, and the best halls are in areas that are even less affordable. There are lots of cuts that should be made across the board, and the product (ie musicians) should be preserved intact. What do you have if you burn that bridge with your biggest asset? But, these groups exist on donations and goodwill, and ticket sales might just be the grain of sand that makes everything viable. Take away the ticket sales and the whole thing falls apart.
(This is just my opinion and experience -- I am not writing authoritatively about military bands)
Usually the general is the biggest supporter of the band on a given post. They are the reason more bands haven't been cut. When the cuts were proposed, no general officer wanted to give up their band. The ones that are gone essentially did not fall directly under a major command or high ranking general. Places like Fort Bragg, where the band was playing on a parade field in front of the commanding general and his officers every day were defended by those same officers.
The comparison is apples to oranges -- Army Bands don't exist to make a profit (aren't allowed to charge, for that matter), and don't really exist for the American public's entertainment. The primary mission is always ceremonial and troop support. COMREL is where the public sees military bands, but it is just a small slice of the mission set. Places like Korea and Germany are different. The commanding general usually wants their band out in front of host nation audiences as often as possible, to build as much good press and create opportunities for command messaging in areas that have a US Military presence that might not be hugely popular. Funds are going to put an American soldier in front of host nation civilians, interact with them, and have a conversation that involves community leaders cooperating with the US military in front of their citizens. Used effectively, the dividends are huge.
The army bands have a different problem where we aren't allowed to charge tickets. So we have trouble playing in good halls. Imagine a decent municipal hall being approached by an army band for a concert engagement with the stipulation that tickets must be free. Even for the finest military bands around, that's a tough sell. I think this point is related to the OP -- halls are not cheap, and the best halls are in areas that are even less affordable. There are lots of cuts that should be made across the board, and the product (ie musicians) should be preserved intact. What do you have if you burn that bridge with your biggest asset? But, these groups exist on donations and goodwill, and ticket sales might just be the grain of sand that makes everything viable. Take away the ticket sales and the whole thing falls apart.
- CalgaryTbone
- Posts: 1460
- Joined: May 10, 2018
Sponsored seats are actually paid (not always in full) by a donation that is in the Endowment Fund. The interest is what goes towards the musician's salary, while the principal stays in the fund. Annual corporate donations are usually targeted towards specific events in the season, like "Joe's Mattress" sponsors the run of "Sleeping Beauty".
Organizations like the Met have an entire department of staff that is involved in fund raising, as well as a board of directors that is involved in that as well. There's no doubt that the pandemic has thrown a wrench into the works, but there is a huge endowment fund where the interest pays much of the budget. I don't think they own the building either, so they are probably not paying rent while they can't use the facility. Likewise, they would not have the costs of building staff like box office or ushers (when they are playing, they would have to cover those costs as part of their rent, but those are Lincoln Center employees). Also, no major singers coming in for each of those operas, so they are saving millions of dollars in those fees.
Also, when they are working, the Met is producing multiple Operas at the same time, and program 8 shows a week of Operas. There was a great NY Times article a year or so ago, that detailed the incredible work of the crew, etc. on a weekend with 4 different Operas in 2 days - Matinee and Evening each day - all different works with different sets, etc.
Lastly, Symphony Orchestras and Opera companies are not designed to make a profit either - they are designated as not-for-profit organizations, which is what makes them eligible to receive tax deductible donations. Obviously, they are also not supposed to lose money either (at least not in perpetuity).
The Met's management would be probably be justified in asking for a different deal from their musicians and chorus for the duration of the current situation, but just sitting on the hundreds of millions the are in their endowment fund, and any cash in their annual operating budget with none of it going to their loyal employees who have given them years of highly respected service is criminal, in my opinion.
Jim Scott
Organizations like the Met have an entire department of staff that is involved in fund raising, as well as a board of directors that is involved in that as well. There's no doubt that the pandemic has thrown a wrench into the works, but there is a huge endowment fund where the interest pays much of the budget. I don't think they own the building either, so they are probably not paying rent while they can't use the facility. Likewise, they would not have the costs of building staff like box office or ushers (when they are playing, they would have to cover those costs as part of their rent, but those are Lincoln Center employees). Also, no major singers coming in for each of those operas, so they are saving millions of dollars in those fees.
Also, when they are working, the Met is producing multiple Operas at the same time, and program 8 shows a week of Operas. There was a great NY Times article a year or so ago, that detailed the incredible work of the crew, etc. on a weekend with 4 different Operas in 2 days - Matinee and Evening each day - all different works with different sets, etc.
Lastly, Symphony Orchestras and Opera companies are not designed to make a profit either - they are designated as not-for-profit organizations, which is what makes them eligible to receive tax deductible donations. Obviously, they are also not supposed to lose money either (at least not in perpetuity).
The Met's management would be probably be justified in asking for a different deal from their musicians and chorus for the duration of the current situation, but just sitting on the hundreds of millions the are in their endowment fund, and any cash in their annual operating budget with none of it going to their loyal employees who have given them years of highly respected service is criminal, in my opinion.
Jim Scott
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
So perhaps the best route ethically is to cash out assets in the fund to ensure everyone on staff can continue on a reduced paycheck. This, of course robs your organization of pay at the original rate in the future because you're not just using dividends to pay people, but reducing your total wealth ...but that would absolutely be more agreeable to everyone is they know they can keep getting paid at a reduced rate and will have to continue on a reduced rate after resuming operations until the fund can catch back up. I don't know how these funds are managed or how the assets can be used, but that would make the most sense.
The CEO and board presidents are probably terrified of dipping into the fund holdings, if they are even allowed to do so.
The CEO and board presidents are probably terrified of dipping into the fund holdings, if they are even allowed to do so.
- Burgerbob
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Apr 23, 2018
[quote="harrisonreed"]So perhaps the best route ethically is to cash out assets in the fund to ensure everyone on staff can continue on a reduced paycheck. This, of course robs your organization of pay at the original rate in the future because you're not just using dividends to pay people, but reducing your total wealth ...but that would absolutely be more agreeable to everyone is they know they can keep getting paid at a reduced rate and will have to continue on a reduced rate after resuming operations until the fund can catch back up. I don't know how these funds are managed or how the assets can be used, but that would make the most sense.
The CEO and board presidents are probably terrified of dipping into the fund holdings, if they are even allowed to do so.[/quote]
Again, every single other major orchestra in the US is doing exactly that.
The CEO and board presidents are probably terrified of dipping into the fund holdings, if they are even allowed to do so.[/quote]
Again, every single other major orchestra in the US is doing exactly that.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
Yeah. I like playing devil's advocate but without the musicians... In other words without The Met... What do you have? It's a no brainer.
- MagnumH
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Mar 06, 2020
I appreciate all the devil's advocacy, and it's certainly not black and white, but there's really no excuse not to pay them when there's money in the bank. This is, hopefully(!), a once in a lifetime situation we're in, and it's exactly when you should dip into those funds. Otherwise there's a very real risk of there not being an orchestra to come back when all is said and done. It's not like NYC is a cheap place to live!
- sf105
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
I can't help thinking that all the US orchestras should go self-managed, given how often they get locked out by the management and the donors who prefer to pay for buildings.
- spencercarran
- Posts: 689
- Joined: Oct 17, 2020
Never play devil's advocate for union busters. Met management is in the wrong and they're sabotaging the future viability of a major cultural institution when they treat the musicians like this.
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
[quote="spencercarran"]Never play devil's advocate for union busters. Met management is in the wrong and they're sabotaging the future viability of a major cultural institution when they treat the musicians like this.[/quote]
It's not just musicians. They are treating EVERYBODY like dirt. Stage hands, scene designers, production staff. Every unionized group is getting stiffed in some way. They are just itching for a strike to kill their resumption season.
It's not just musicians. They are treating EVERYBODY like dirt. Stage hands, scene designers, production staff. Every unionized group is getting stiffed in some way. They are just itching for a strike to kill their resumption season.
- Posaunus
- Posts: 5018
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
Speaking of the Met, James Levine passed away (probably from Parkinson's Disease) on March 9.
An exceptionally talented musician, but apparently not a good person. Very sad.
An exceptionally talented musician, but apparently not a good person. Very sad.
- Burgerbob
- Posts: 6327
- Joined: Apr 23, 2018
[quote="spencercarran"]Never play devil's advocate for union busters. Met management is in the wrong and they're sabotaging the future viability of a major cultural institution when they treat the musicians like this.[/quote]
:clever:
:clever:
- CalgaryTbone
- Posts: 1460
- Joined: May 10, 2018
[quote="spencercarran"]Never play devil's advocate for union busters. Met management is in the wrong and they're sabotaging the future viability of a major cultural institution when they treat the musicians like this.[/quote]
Self management is tough thing, particularly in the US where fund raising is a major part of the management responsibilities. Also, it would be a non-starter for an Opera company. Who is in charge - the musicians, the chorus, the stage crew? There are multiple pieces to the puzzle.
All that really needs to happen is that no one should be hired to run an arts organization without being firmly committed to the idea that the people who produce the art are the most important asset of the organization. Arguing about raises or workload is fine, but provide people with emergency funds during a pandemic!
Jim Scott
Self management is tough thing, particularly in the US where fund raising is a major part of the management responsibilities. Also, it would be a non-starter for an Opera company. Who is in charge - the musicians, the chorus, the stage crew? There are multiple pieces to the puzzle.
All that really needs to happen is that no one should be hired to run an arts organization without being firmly committed to the idea that the people who produce the art are the most important asset of the organization. Arguing about raises or workload is fine, but provide people with emergency funds during a pandemic!
Jim Scott
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
After reading several articles I'm still not sure of the financial relationship between Lincoln Center, the Metropolitan Opera Company and the Metropolitan Opera House. They all seem to be distinct entities.
Who owns what? Who owes who? Who pays who to be where they are? Which is most disadvantaged by current lack of activity?
Who owns what? Who owes who? Who pays who to be where they are? Which is most disadvantaged by current lack of activity?
- FOSSIL
- Posts: 688
- Joined: Jul 09, 2019
[quote="robcat2075"]After reading several articles I'm still not sure of the financial relationship between Lincoln Center, the Metropolitan Opera Company and the Metropolitan Opera House. They all seem to be distinct entities.
Who owns what? Who owes who? Who pays who to be where they are? Which is most disadvantaged by current lack of activity?[/quote]
This complexity is not unusual....Scottish Opera bought the Theatre Royal Glasgow from Scottish Television for £1 in the 1970s !! By the 1990s it was a huge financial drain and the company leased it for 25 years to a specialist Theatre group. That lease will expire soon and who knows what will happen next.
Chris
Who owns what? Who owes who? Who pays who to be where they are? Which is most disadvantaged by current lack of activity?[/quote]
This complexity is not unusual....Scottish Opera bought the Theatre Royal Glasgow from Scottish Television for £1 in the 1970s !! By the 1990s it was a huge financial drain and the company leased it for 25 years to a specialist Theatre group. That lease will expire soon and who knows what will happen next.
Chris
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
Are there any self-supporting, living wage, symphony orchestras or opera companies? Something where the audience tickets pay the bills and they don't need a "board" of well-heeled donors to keep things afloat?
The nearest example I can think of is possibly(?) Andre Rieu's "Johann Strauss Orchestra" which maintains a barnstorming tour schedule of one-nighters to play waltzes and polkas.
The nearest example I can think of is possibly(?) Andre Rieu's "Johann Strauss Orchestra" which maintains a barnstorming tour schedule of one-nighters to play waltzes and polkas.
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
Lincoln Center (comprised of the Met Opera House, the NY State Theater, Philharmonic Hall (now renamed), the Beaumont Theater, and the Library of the Performing Arts) was built as an entity to be home to several New York City cultural organizations. None of the organizations actually owned the buildings and the upkeep was handled by the Center management. All of these organizations used to perform in other theaters in New York City (the Met had its Opera House on 39th Street, the Philharmonic performed in Carnegie Hall, New York City Ballet performed in City Center, and the Music Library was located on the East side).
The Metropolitan Opera has its chorus, orchestra, scene shop, stage crew, etc. Principal singers are independent contractors and are hired for a particular production.
The Metropolitan Opera has its chorus, orchestra, scene shop, stage crew, etc. Principal singers are independent contractors and are hired for a particular production.
- ssking2b
- Posts: 487
- Joined: Sep 29, 2018
Y'all seem to forget, it's not about music and arts - it's about greed. We musicians are just a necessary evil for these rats to line their pockets are our expense with our money.
- Bach5G
- Posts: 2874
- Joined: Apr 07, 2018
An argument might be made that, from a business perspective, managing an arts org through a pandemic requires even greater senior management skills, given the unusual and extraordinary circumstances.
Nah, I’m not buying it either.
Nah, I’m not buying it either.
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
Understand that ticket sales are generated by the featured singers and the opera presented. Not by the orchestra, not by the chorus, not by the scenery, and not by the stage crew. All of the above are costs of goods sold. Although a crappy orchestra, out-of-tune chorus, sloppy scenery, and clumsy stage crew can all negatively affect repeat sales.
We have to get beyond the "bottom line" management style that has taken over everything and start a more balanced system where you value the people who are creating the product as much as the people buying it.
We have to get beyond the "bottom line" management style that has taken over everything and start a more balanced system where you value the people who are creating the product as much as the people buying it.
- CalgaryTbone
- Posts: 1460
- Joined: May 10, 2018
[quote="robcat2075"]Are there any self-supporting, living wage, symphony orchestras or opera companies? Something where the audience tickets pay the bills and they don't need a "board" of well-heeled donors to keep things afloat?
The nearest example I can think of is possibly(?) Andre Rieu's "Johann Strauss Orchestra" which maintains a barnstorming tour schedule of one-nighters to play waltzes and polkas.[/quote]
First of all, I don't know the details (I don't have an online NY Times subscription), but it looks like the Met management has just agreed to start paying the musicians. That is good news!
I'm not sure there's any way to have an Orchestra without a Management that provides any real steady employment in a long-term manner. The J. Strauss Orch. is a small group that must tour constantly to earn a living. They play the same limited repertoire constantly, which means that there is no way to present concerts in the same general area other than for a week or two consecutively. That might be OK for a young player with the debts from school, looking to make some cash to set themselves up somewhere, but no one is going to do something like that for a long career, with no chance to have a life - a house with a yard, kids, a dog, etc. There are gigs in the music business in all genres that involve constant travel - very few people do them longterm, and they aren't necessarily stable for longterm. When Andre Rieu doesn't want to tour anymore, that gig is gone. I won't go in to my personal feelings about that "music" for more than a week either.
I don't think that the model for running orchestras is broken, but occasionally you find that an individual or small group of people leaves their conscience at the door, like in this situation. In a small way, online discussions like the one here may have been helpful in bringing it to the attention of the reporter who wrote the NY Times story that brought the Management back to the table. A critical story had something to do with their offer of some compensation to the players.
Jim Scott
The nearest example I can think of is possibly(?) Andre Rieu's "Johann Strauss Orchestra" which maintains a barnstorming tour schedule of one-nighters to play waltzes and polkas.[/quote]
First of all, I don't know the details (I don't have an online NY Times subscription), but it looks like the Met management has just agreed to start paying the musicians. That is good news!
I'm not sure there's any way to have an Orchestra without a Management that provides any real steady employment in a long-term manner. The J. Strauss Orch. is a small group that must tour constantly to earn a living. They play the same limited repertoire constantly, which means that there is no way to present concerts in the same general area other than for a week or two consecutively. That might be OK for a young player with the debts from school, looking to make some cash to set themselves up somewhere, but no one is going to do something like that for a long career, with no chance to have a life - a house with a yard, kids, a dog, etc. There are gigs in the music business in all genres that involve constant travel - very few people do them longterm, and they aren't necessarily stable for longterm. When Andre Rieu doesn't want to tour anymore, that gig is gone. I won't go in to my personal feelings about that "music" for more than a week either.
I don't think that the model for running orchestras is broken, but occasionally you find that an individual or small group of people leaves their conscience at the door, like in this situation. In a small way, online discussions like the one here may have been helpful in bringing it to the attention of the reporter who wrote the NY Times story that brought the Management back to the table. A critical story had something to do with their offer of some compensation to the players.
Jim Scott
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
[quote="ssking2b"]Y'all seem to forget, it's not about music and arts - it's about greed. We musicians are just a necessary evil for these rats to line their pockets are our expense with our money.[/quote]
There are far surer ways for rats to line their pockets than running an opera company.
But maybe they're not very smart rats.
There are far surer ways for rats to line their pockets than running an opera company.
But maybe they're not very smart rats.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
[quote="robcat2075"]<QUOTE author="ssking2b" post_id="143787" time="1616080297" user_id="3785">
Y'all seem to forget, it's not about music and arts - it's about greed. We musicians are just a necessary evil for these rats to line their pockets are our expense with our money.[/quote]
There are far surer ways for rats to line their pockets than running an opera company.
But maybe they're not very smart rats.
</QUOTE>
This is why I think it might come down to how the fund managers are allowed to manage the funds. It's possible they are not allowed to liquidate any of the holdings. Perhaps a wealthy patron didn't just hand over a huge portfolio and say here you go. There is probably a legal document in place that says what they can do. But that is all just a guess.
Does anyone know how much of a fund they are sitting on? For example: Even $100 million in a fixed income ETF would give you only about 5 million dollars of cash a year to play with, and that is nothing if orchestra members are expecting a living wage in NY. Still, putting myself in that position, it would be worse to dip into it to pay salaries if grants and sponsorships and ticket sales dry up. Now your $100 million is $90 million, and $500,000 dollars of dividends have vanished, every year. Better to stretch that fund yield as far as you can in the most equitable way possible.
It all points to a bad business model, managed in a pretty gross way.
Y'all seem to forget, it's not about music and arts - it's about greed. We musicians are just a necessary evil for these rats to line their pockets are our expense with our money.[/quote]
There are far surer ways for rats to line their pockets than running an opera company.
But maybe they're not very smart rats.
</QUOTE>
This is why I think it might come down to how the fund managers are allowed to manage the funds. It's possible they are not allowed to liquidate any of the holdings. Perhaps a wealthy patron didn't just hand over a huge portfolio and say here you go. There is probably a legal document in place that says what they can do. But that is all just a guess.
Does anyone know how much of a fund they are sitting on? For example: Even $100 million in a fixed income ETF would give you only about 5 million dollars of cash a year to play with, and that is nothing if orchestra members are expecting a living wage in NY. Still, putting myself in that position, it would be worse to dip into it to pay salaries if grants and sponsorships and ticket sales dry up. Now your $100 million is $90 million, and $500,000 dollars of dividends have vanished, every year. Better to stretch that fund yield as far as you can in the most equitable way possible.
It all points to a bad business model, managed in a pretty gross way.
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
[quote="harrisonreed"]Does anyone know how much of a fund they are sitting on?[/quote]
[url]<LINK_TEXT text="https://observer.com/2020/12/metropolit ... t-pay-cut/">https://observer.com/2020/12/metropolitan-opera-stagehands-lockout-30-percent-pay-cut/</LINK_TEXT>
They've hocked the furniture
$270 million is less than the Met's typical[url=https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Metropolitan+opera+annual+budget]annual budget of $300 million
by way of comparison the Dallas Symphony has[url=https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Dallas+Symphony+orchestra+endowment]an endowment of $96 million and typical [url=https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Dallas+Symphont+annual+budget]annual budget of $40 million.
So the Metropolitan Opera is pretty much living hand-to-mouth.
Although the Metropolitan Opera has an endowment of $270 million, it also has a significant amount of bonded debt, and is still relying upon a letter of credit that is backed by the enormous Lincoln Center Chagall murals in order to affirm the institution’s reliability.
They've hocked the furniture
$270 million is less than the Met's typical
by way of comparison the Dallas Symphony has
So the Metropolitan Opera is pretty much living hand-to-mouth.
- JohnL
- Posts: 2529
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="harrisonreed"]This is why I think it might come down to how the fund managers are allowed to manage the funds. It's possible they are not allowed to liquidate any of the holdings. Perhaps a wealthy patron didn't just hand over a huge portfolio and say here you go. There is probably a legal document in place that says what they can do. But that is all just a guess.[/quote]
It's a good guess. People who can afford to make big enough donations to be referred to as "philanthropists" often place very specific conditions on their gifts in order to insure that they're used in the way the donor intended.
It's a good guess. People who can afford to make big enough donations to be referred to as "philanthropists" often place very specific conditions on their gifts in order to insure that they're used in the way the donor intended.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
[quote="robcat2075"]<QUOTE author="harrisonreed" post_id="143859" time="1616122616" user_id="3642">
Does anyone know how much of a fund they are sitting on?[/quote]
[url]<LINK_TEXT text="https://observer.com/2020/12/metropolit ... t-pay-cut/">https://observer.com/2020/12/metropolitan-opera-stagehands-lockout-30-percent-pay-cut/</LINK_TEXT>
They've hocked the furniture
$270 million is less than the Met's typical[url=https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Metropolitan+opera+annual+budget]annual budget of $300 million
by way of comparison the Dallas Symphony has[url=https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Dallas+Symphony+orchestra+endowment]an endowment of $96 million and typical [url=https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Dallas+Symphont+annual+budget]annual budget of $40 million.
So the Metropolitan Opera is pretty much living hand-to-mouth.
</QUOTE>
So this is where the cracks start showing. Someone who has no investments looks at this and says, oh they are horrible, sitting on $270 million and not paying anyone. Well, they aren't getting that ever year, and it isn't cash. It's some fund started by a wealthy opera lover (maybe?) that is all stocks and maybe some bonds, probably in the form of a blue chip stock fund. At 5% yield (which is generous) you're not even getting $15 million a year out of that in cash. That probably would barely keep all the musicians afloat on wages to help them keep their homes and feed themselves. It's not a lot of money. This says nothing of the management, who no matter how horrible they are, has to eat and pay for housing too. So even if everyone takes a big pay cut, no one is making it on that. If the organization has 200 employees total, you're getting no more than $75k each, in NYC... better than nothing, better than the current situation to be sure. But there will still be other expenses besides just employee's pay, maybe much larger expenses.
I'm assuming the "bonded debt" is another investment fund full of bonds or bond ETFs paying out 3%. It would be interesting to see what they have in bond assets.
I think it would be foolish to dip into the fund when you realize how tenuous that is, and like I said they are most likely not allowed to do so anyways.
The real issue is the fact that their annual operating budget is $300 million dollars, more than their endowment fund... What are the sets made out of, gold? That is ridiculously high, and you'd need billions of dollars invested to reliably produce that kind of yield. ...and the Met probably would set their annual operating budget at "billionz of dollerz" if their endowment fund was that large. Craziness.
I'm guessing that most of that budget goes to overpaid management, and overpaid singers, and huge buffets for corporate donors and the bond issuers, and there is no safety net. The business model, even as a non profit, is deeply flawed. This is the kind of stuff you wouldn't even think to look into if you won a job at the Met.
Does anyone know how much of a fund they are sitting on?[/quote]
Although the Metropolitan Opera has an endowment of $270 million, it also has a significant amount of bonded debt, and is still relying upon a letter of credit that is backed by the enormous Lincoln Center Chagall murals in order to affirm the institution’s reliability.
They've hocked the furniture
$270 million is less than the Met's typical
by way of comparison the Dallas Symphony has
So the Metropolitan Opera is pretty much living hand-to-mouth.
</QUOTE>
So this is where the cracks start showing. Someone who has no investments looks at this and says, oh they are horrible, sitting on $270 million and not paying anyone. Well, they aren't getting that ever year, and it isn't cash. It's some fund started by a wealthy opera lover (maybe?) that is all stocks and maybe some bonds, probably in the form of a blue chip stock fund. At 5% yield (which is generous) you're not even getting $15 million a year out of that in cash. That probably would barely keep all the musicians afloat on wages to help them keep their homes and feed themselves. It's not a lot of money. This says nothing of the management, who no matter how horrible they are, has to eat and pay for housing too. So even if everyone takes a big pay cut, no one is making it on that. If the organization has 200 employees total, you're getting no more than $75k each, in NYC... better than nothing, better than the current situation to be sure. But there will still be other expenses besides just employee's pay, maybe much larger expenses.
I'm assuming the "bonded debt" is another investment fund full of bonds or bond ETFs paying out 3%. It would be interesting to see what they have in bond assets.
I think it would be foolish to dip into the fund when you realize how tenuous that is, and like I said they are most likely not allowed to do so anyways.
The real issue is the fact that their annual operating budget is $300 million dollars, more than their endowment fund... What are the sets made out of, gold? That is ridiculously high, and you'd need billions of dollars invested to reliably produce that kind of yield. ...and the Met probably would set their annual operating budget at "billionz of dollerz" if their endowment fund was that large. Craziness.
I'm guessing that most of that budget goes to overpaid management, and overpaid singers, and huge buffets for corporate donors and the bond issuers, and there is no safety net. The business model, even as a non profit, is deeply flawed. This is the kind of stuff you wouldn't even think to look into if you won a job at the Met.
- LeTromboniste
- Posts: 1634
- Joined: Apr 11, 2018
[quote="harrisonreed"]I'm guessing that most of that budget goes to overpaid management, and overpaid singers, and huge buffets for corporate donors and the bond issuers, and there is no safety net. The business model, even as a non profit, is deeply flawed. This is the kind of stuff you wouldn't even think to look into if you won a job at the Met.[/quote]
Overpaid everyone, really, except maybe technical, service and low-level admin staff.
Beyond the obvious problems of how the budget is managed and how not sustainable it is, and that yes, not compensating the musicians and staff was unforgivable, what we're not talking about is how insane it is that a single arts organisation can syphon 300 million a year in the first place! Yes, management positions are paid too much, but we need to face the fact that the winner-takes-all mentality in classical music (especially in North America, and especially in the US), that leads to conductors and top soloists earning millions and to having base starting salaries for top orchestras well into the 6-figure range, is absolutely toxic to the field as a whole. No wonder why there are so few full-time orchestras and opera companies per capita in the US, when so much of the resources are taken by so few organisations.
Overpaid everyone, really, except maybe technical, service and low-level admin staff.
Beyond the obvious problems of how the budget is managed and how not sustainable it is, and that yes, not compensating the musicians and staff was unforgivable, what we're not talking about is how insane it is that a single arts organisation can syphon 300 million a year in the first place! Yes, management positions are paid too much, but we need to face the fact that the winner-takes-all mentality in classical music (especially in North America, and especially in the US), that leads to conductors and top soloists earning millions and to having base starting salaries for top orchestras well into the 6-figure range, is absolutely toxic to the field as a whole. No wonder why there are so few full-time orchestras and opera companies per capita in the US, when so much of the resources are taken by so few organisations.
- Kdanielsen
- Posts: 609
- Joined: Jul 28, 2019
Artistic endeavors are basically always poor financial choices, so it’s not shocking to me that financial people making financial choices about artistic organizations get it wrong.
Of course they get it wrong. And of course they think they are getting it right.
Of course they get it wrong. And of course they think they are getting it right.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
You mean, "artistic" people making financial decisions. No sane businessperson would have operating costs set at more than the endowment value.
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
According to [url=https://www.metopera.org/about/annual-reports/]their 2019 annual report only 27% of their revenue comes from tickets. 53% is "Contributions, including Net Assets Released from Restrictions". In ten years their ticket sales have gone from 83% of capacity to 67%
[quote="harrisonreed"]I'm assuming the "bonded debt" is another investment fund full of bonds or bond ETFs paying out 3%.[/quote]
Per[url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-26/metropolitan-opera-debt-cut-to-junk-after-virus-cancels-season]this Bloomberg article the Met's debt in bonds is at least $89 million. It is not clear what their annual payment is nor when the principle comes due.
I presume the interest they pay on debt is included in the annual report's "other expenses" of $73 million in 2019.
The Bloomberg article notes their debt has been classified as "junK" which doesn't relieve them of the obligation of paying it but does warn anyone thinking of lending them money in the future that they are unlikely to be able to pay on time or at all and it also indicates that if you bought any Met bonds in the past it will be difficult to resell them for anything close to their on-paper worth.
[quote="harrisonreed"]I'm assuming the "bonded debt" is another investment fund full of bonds or bond ETFs paying out 3%.[/quote]
Per
I presume the interest they pay on debt is included in the annual report's "other expenses" of $73 million in 2019.
The Bloomberg article notes their debt has been classified as "junK" which doesn't relieve them of the obligation of paying it but does warn anyone thinking of lending them money in the future that they are unlikely to be able to pay on time or at all and it also indicates that if you bought any Met bonds in the past it will be difficult to resell them for anything close to their on-paper worth.
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
[quote="harrisonreed"]No sane businessperson would have operating costs set at more than the endowment value.[/quote]
No, that would be normal.
Businesses and corporations operate with no endowment at all. The money they make from their product is what pays the bills to make the product. If they have investments that are making money they tend not to be a huge part of the financial picture.
I presume most non-profits and charities have little to no endowment either.
Endowments are something famous schools and arts institutions can acquire after years of building enough good will that happy patrons will want to donate to such a thing but most organizations have to make do without it.
No, that would be normal.
Businesses and corporations operate with no endowment at all. The money they make from their product is what pays the bills to make the product. If they have investments that are making money they tend not to be a huge part of the financial picture.
I presume most non-profits and charities have little to no endowment either.
Endowments are something famous schools and arts institutions can acquire after years of building enough good will that happy patrons will want to donate to such a thing but most organizations have to make do without it.
- Kdanielsen
- Posts: 609
- Joined: Jul 28, 2019
[quote="harrisonreed"]You mean, "artistic" people making financial decisions. No sane businessperson would have operating costs set at more than the endowment value.[/quote]
I guess i mean the executive type people at the top of these organizations with no actual artistic ability, who's "talent" is for "business" (whatever that means). I mean business people making decisions about running an artistic institution.
I suppose some of these people think they are "artistic."
I guess i mean the executive type people at the top of these organizations with no actual artistic ability, who's "talent" is for "business" (whatever that means). I mean business people making decisions about running an artistic institution.
I suppose some of these people think they are "artistic."
- Bach5G
- Posts: 2874
- Joined: Apr 07, 2018
Once upon a time, I attended an administrative law seminar in which the Minister of Labour talked about the various successes of his admin law system, as measured by various business metrics, such as cases completed per month, average cost per claim, that sort of thing.
In the question period that followed, a gentleman asked if this was the appropriate way to rate a “justice” system. A good question, I thought, and one that has stuck with me.
So, how to rate an arts org? Profit/loss? Subscription base? Size of endowment? I’ve seen arts orgs brag about these in the past. Are business metrics important or relevant beyond keeping track of and not pissing away the money? Do you need a well-paid MBA to schmooze the potential donors more than you need a good principal trumpet? Assuming you can’t have both. Does the AD report to the CEO, or other way around?
I wonder if in an orchestra managed by the musicians, the oboist would be paid more than, say, second trombone and, if so, how everyone would feel about that. How would everyone feel about gov’t support/subsidies, if everyone had to take a cut in pay?
In the question period that followed, a gentleman asked if this was the appropriate way to rate a “justice” system. A good question, I thought, and one that has stuck with me.
So, how to rate an arts org? Profit/loss? Subscription base? Size of endowment? I’ve seen arts orgs brag about these in the past. Are business metrics important or relevant beyond keeping track of and not pissing away the money? Do you need a well-paid MBA to schmooze the potential donors more than you need a good principal trumpet? Assuming you can’t have both. Does the AD report to the CEO, or other way around?
I wonder if in an orchestra managed by the musicians, the oboist would be paid more than, say, second trombone and, if so, how everyone would feel about that. How would everyone feel about gov’t support/subsidies, if everyone had to take a cut in pay?
- WilliamLang
- Posts: 636
- Joined: Nov 22, 2019
most modern internet companies (facebook, twitter, youtube, uber, etc.) operate at a loss using future profits to attract potential investors. i guess the difference is that opera doesn't have the stock market ceiling that the lottery ticket silicon valley start-ups have.
also the european orchestras run by the musicians seem to work quite well - I remember not too long ago bousfield was comparing orchestral models on his podcast and was favorable to musician run groups. but we're not in europe.
there might not be a way to fix things in america without a democrat-led government deciding to reinvest in the arts. (i believe this is less political commentary than plain fact at this point, cause i don't want to go down the politics route please.)
also the european orchestras run by the musicians seem to work quite well - I remember not too long ago bousfield was comparing orchestral models on his podcast and was favorable to musician run groups. but we're not in europe.
there might not be a way to fix things in america without a democrat-led government deciding to reinvest in the arts. (i believe this is less political commentary than plain fact at this point, cause i don't want to go down the politics route please.)
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
[quote="Bach5G"]I wonder if in an orchestra managed by the musicians, the oboist would be paid more than, say, second trombone and, if so, how everyone would feel about that.[/quote]
I'm reminded of how someone went through the financial filings of the LA Philharmonic and found that, after the concertmaster, the highest-paid player was... the bassoon. :D
<LINK_TEXT text="https://slippedisc.com/2015/02/bassoon- ... id-player/">https://slippedisc.com/2015/02/bassoon-is-las-second-highest-paid-player/</LINK_TEXT>
[quote="WilliamLang"]also the european orchestras run by the musicians seem to work quite well - I remember not too long ago bousfield was comparing orchestral models on his podcast and was favorable to musician run groups. but we're not in europe.[/quote]
Some of the European orchestras are "governed" by the players, like they get to choose their conductor, but they all operate with substantial state subsidies. I'm not sure what the state controls are in those cases but in recent years some of these orchestras are finding them selves on the state subsidy chopping block.
I'm reminded of how someone went through the financial filings of the LA Philharmonic and found that, after the concertmaster, the highest-paid player was... the bassoon. :D
<LINK_TEXT text="https://slippedisc.com/2015/02/bassoon- ... id-player/">https://slippedisc.com/2015/02/bassoon-is-las-second-highest-paid-player/</LINK_TEXT>
[quote="WilliamLang"]also the european orchestras run by the musicians seem to work quite well - I remember not too long ago bousfield was comparing orchestral models on his podcast and was favorable to musician run groups. but we're not in europe.[/quote]
Some of the European orchestras are "governed" by the players, like they get to choose their conductor, but they all operate with substantial state subsidies. I'm not sure what the state controls are in those cases but in recent years some of these orchestras are finding them selves on the state subsidy chopping block.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
[quote="robcat2075"]According to [url=https://www.metopera.org/about/annual-reports/]their 2019 annual report only 27% of their revenue comes from tickets. 53% is "Contributions, including Net Assets Released from Restrictions". In ten years their ticket sales have gone from 83% of capacity to 67%
<QUOTE author="harrisonreed" post_id="143872" time="1616136367" user_id="3642">
I'm assuming the "bonded debt" is another investment fund full of bonds or bond ETFs paying out 3%.[/quote]
Per[url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-26/metropolitan-opera-debt-cut-to-junk-after-virus-cancels-season]this Bloomberg article the Met's debt in bonds is at least $89 million. It is not clear what their annual payment is nor when the principle comes due.
I presume the interest they pay on debt is included in the annual report's "other expenses" of $73 million in 2019.
The Bloomberg article notes their debt has been classified as "junK" which doesn't relieve them of the obligation of paying it but does warn anyone thinking of lending them money in the future that they are unlikely to be able to pay on time or at all and it also indicates that if you bought any Met bonds in the past it will be difficult to resell them for anything close to their on-paper worth.
</QUOTE>
I took it is debt the Met owned, paying them interest, not debt they owed. That is some bizarro-world stuff if they actually owed others interest on "Met bonds" when they already beyond underwater.
Reading the article, you're right. Wow. I wouldn't expect any return on a "Met bond"...
<QUOTE author="harrisonreed" post_id="143872" time="1616136367" user_id="3642">
I'm assuming the "bonded debt" is another investment fund full of bonds or bond ETFs paying out 3%.[/quote]
Per
I presume the interest they pay on debt is included in the annual report's "other expenses" of $73 million in 2019.
The Bloomberg article notes their debt has been classified as "junK" which doesn't relieve them of the obligation of paying it but does warn anyone thinking of lending them money in the future that they are unlikely to be able to pay on time or at all and it also indicates that if you bought any Met bonds in the past it will be difficult to resell them for anything close to their on-paper worth.
</QUOTE>
I took it is debt the Met owned, paying them interest, not debt they owed. That is some bizarro-world stuff if they actually owed others interest on "Met bonds" when they already beyond underwater.
Reading the article, you're right. Wow. I wouldn't expect any return on a "Met bond"...
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
You are much better off making a donation (tax deductible) than buying a "Met Bond". But there may be some tax advantages to the bond that I don't understand.
We as a people need to decide if it's worthwhile to support arts organizations like Operas, Orchestras, or Ballets. Many Americans think "Classical Music" is a song by Willie Nelson. To some extent it's the fault of the current crop of "Legit" composers who write obtuse music that isn't easy to digest and alienates people. Add to that the fact that performing organizations tend to play music that is very old. Now you have a reason the younger generation has no interest in what we do.
We as a people need to decide if it's worthwhile to support arts organizations like Operas, Orchestras, or Ballets. Many Americans think "Classical Music" is a song by Willie Nelson. To some extent it's the fault of the current crop of "Legit" composers who write obtuse music that isn't easy to digest and alienates people. Add to that the fact that performing organizations tend to play music that is very old. Now you have a reason the younger generation has no interest in what we do.
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
The advantage of bonds such as the Met or GM or a local government offer is they typically pay a higher interest rate than you can get in a bank account, and they are predictable income... as long as they don't default. That lurking danger is why they must pay a higher interest rate than a bank, in which your savings are insured against failure, in order to attract buyers. Some are Federal tax-free.
i inherited some municipal bonds from my dad that were paying 5%. No bank pays that. Easy money! I also inherited some Puerto Rican bonds that went bad and have been "restructured" after a long court case. I will eventually collect about a third of what they were originally supposed to pay... if i live to the new "maturity" date of July 1, 2058.
I presume the Met sold bonds to finance some needed permanent improvement rather than just to pay operating costs. That is usually why bonds get sold.
The reasons for selling bonds need to be disclosed to the buyers along with substantial explanation of how they will be paid back. The "Prospectus". They were probably sold in better times when the Met was doing better than breaking even and had better future prospects. 10 or even 20 years ago? At the time, someone must have thought they were worth the risk.
i inherited some municipal bonds from my dad that were paying 5%. No bank pays that. Easy money! I also inherited some Puerto Rican bonds that went bad and have been "restructured" after a long court case. I will eventually collect about a third of what they were originally supposed to pay... if i live to the new "maturity" date of July 1, 2058.
I presume the Met sold bonds to finance some needed permanent improvement rather than just to pay operating costs. That is usually why bonds get sold.
The reasons for selling bonds need to be disclosed to the buyers along with substantial explanation of how they will be paid back. The "Prospectus". They were probably sold in better times when the Met was doing better than breaking even and had better future prospects. 10 or even 20 years ago? At the time, someone must have thought they were worth the risk.
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
Excerpt from interview with Peter Gelb in a French outlet
[url]<LINK_TEXT text="
https://slippedisc.com/2021/03/peter-g ... stands-me/">
https://slippedisc.com/2021/03/peter-gelb-no-one-understands-me/</LINK_TEXT>
Full article (in French):[url]<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.francemusique.fr/actualite- ... gelb-93875">https://www.francemusique.fr/actualite-musicale/mon-objectif-n-est-pas-de-faire-souffrir-les-artistes-mais-de-sauver-une-institution-peter-gelb-93875</LINK_TEXT>
https://slippedisc.com/2021/03/peter-g ... stands-me/">
https://slippedisc.com/2021/03/peter-gelb-no-one-understands-me/</LINK_TEXT>
‘I know that there has been a lot of criticism of the decisions taken by the MET last spring, in particular to dismiss all the musicians and the choirs of the MET, but unlike other operas, like that of Paris, we do we have no government support, we are not financially supported, we have absolutely no other choice.
‘The contracts clearly stipulate that in case of force majeure, if there are no shows, the contracts are no longer financially honored.
Full article (in French):
- sf105
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
[quote="robcat2075"]Some of the European orchestras are "governed" by the players, like they get to choose their conductor, but they all operate with substantial state subsidies. I'm not sure what the state controls are in those cases but in recent years some of these orchestras are finding them selves on the state subsidy chopping block.[/quote]
The US orchestras also run with substantial state subsidies in the form of tax breaks for funders, but the state has no say in who gets it. US sports facilities, on the other hand, get significantly larger direct subsidies.
S
The US orchestras also run with substantial state subsidies in the form of tax breaks for funders, but the state has no say in who gets it. US sports facilities, on the other hand, get significantly larger direct subsidies.
S
- sf105
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
[quote="Burgerbob"]What the Met is doing is pretty reprehensible. They are the richest orchestra organization perhaps in the world- there's basically no excuse for this.[/quote]
It gets worse, now it turns out that they paid Levine $3.5 million while the staff got nothing. He must have had a fantastic agent.
<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/17/obit ... -dead.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/17/obituaries/james-levine-dead.html</LINK_TEXT>
https://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2021/03/18/james-levine/
It gets worse, now it turns out that they paid Levine $3.5 million while the staff got nothing. He must have had a fantastic agent.
<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/17/obit ... -dead.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/17/obituaries/james-levine-dead.html</LINK_TEXT>
https://kennethwoods.net/blog1/2021/03/18/james-levine/
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
You realize that $3.5 million only pays for 15 musicians (out of over 100). Sure, it's bad optics but I would hardly call that worse.
- Bach5G
- Posts: 2874
- Joined: Apr 07, 2018
The Kenneth Woods piece is extremely powerful. No tears for J Levine.
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
$3.5 million would pay 100 musicians $35K each. That might have been enough to avert complete disaster in their lives.
But regardless of that being paid to Levine, it's only a bit more than 1% of the Met's typical budget. They could have made such a payment with their available funds but they seem to have chosen not to because they weren't' absolutely obligated to.
But regardless of that being paid to Levine, it's only a bit more than 1% of the Met's typical budget. They could have made such a payment with their available funds but they seem to have chosen not to because they weren't' absolutely obligated to.
- Bach5G
- Posts: 2874
- Joined: Apr 07, 2018
When you start talking about force majeure, it sounds like the lawyers got involved.
CEO: Do we have to pay the musicians?
Lawyer: “Under the agreement with the musicians, blah blah, force majeure, no.”
CEO: Screw ‘em.
CEO: Do we have to pay the musicians?
Lawyer: “Under the agreement with the musicians, blah blah, force majeure, no.”
CEO: Screw ‘em.
- Posaunus
- Posts: 5018
- Joined: Mar 23, 2018
[quote="Bach5G"]When you start talking about force majeure, it sounds like the lawyers got involved.[/quote]
Darn lawyers! Never met one I ...
Oops, sorry 5G!
Darn lawyers! Never met one I ...
Oops, sorry 5G!
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
On the other hand there aren't just 100 musicians to pay. According to this article there are 3000 Met employees.
3000? Full-time?
[url]<LINK_TEXT text="
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/19/9693974 ... is-nothing">
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/19/969397479/metropolitan-opera-backstage-workers-without-people-the-opera-is-nothing</LINK_TEXT>
3000? Full-time?
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/19/9693974 ... is-nothing">
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/19/969397479/metropolitan-opera-backstage-workers-without-people-the-opera-is-nothing</LINK_TEXT>
A union representing 800 backstage workers at New York's Metropolitan Opera began a publicity campaign today urging donors and government entities to withdraw support for the company because of a labor dispute.
The Met is the largest performing arts organization in the United States, employing close to 3,000 people, with an annual budget of over $300 million. When it shut down because of COVID last March, the company cited the force majeure provision of its agreements, and made the decision to furlough all its union artists and craftspeople.
In the midst of the furloughs, contracts with the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, or IATSE — which represents workers, from stagehands to box office personnel to make-up artists — expired. The two sides met for several negotiating sessions, beginning last July. The Met offered IATSE members a weekly "bridge" payment of $1,527 during the pandemic, contingent on a 30% pay cut when it was over. The union offered several counterproposals, says James Claffey Jr., president of IATSE Local 1: "We offered a significant reduction for a year's time, and we were prepared to actually go for a longer period of time, at an even greater reduction. But we never got there." Talks broke down in early December, and the union has been locked out since then.
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
It turns out "force majeur" is French for... "force majeur"!
Huh.
Huh.
Les contrats stipulent clairement, qu’en cas de force majeur, et qu’il n’y a pas de spectacles, les contrats ne sont plus financièrement honorés.
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
I don't know if you've ever seen a Met production. The number of backstage crew is impressive. Also, the same stage crew can't do all 8 performances in the week, so you have to have at least 2 full crews. This includes sets, props, lighting, stage management, costumes, makeup, and probably a few skills I have forgotten. Plus there's a chorus and a ballet company. Again, you need more than one crew for each because you can't expect the performers to do 8 performances in a week. Similarly, the orchestra needs nearly 2 full crews. Add it all up and there are an awfully large number of pigs feeding at the trough. That doesn't change the callous treatment of all the Union folks by the Management. Again, it's the Bottom Line Management style. And you wonder why workers don't have any company loyalty. They'd probably have more if the company showed some loyalty to them.
Btw, "force majeur" is also a legal term meaning "beyond our control".
Btw, "force majeur" is also a legal term meaning "beyond our control".
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
3000 employees. Non-profit. Overblown budget even during normal times. What a disaster.
I guess the lesson is, at the end of the rainbow when you've won the audition of your life and you've made it, you still might just be employed by Enron-esque house of cards. It wouldn't hurt if better tabs were being kept on how these organizations operate so people know what they are getting into.
I suppose if you ran it "for profit", you wouldn't even get off the ground though, no matter how efficient.
I guess the lesson is, at the end of the rainbow when you've won the audition of your life and you've made it, you still might just be employed by Enron-esque house of cards. It wouldn't hurt if better tabs were being kept on how these organizations operate so people know what they are getting into.
I suppose if you ran it "for profit", you wouldn't even get off the ground though, no matter how efficient.
- Bach5G
- Posts: 2874
- Joined: Apr 07, 2018
“ Add it all up and there are an awfully large number of pigs feeding at the trough.”
I might be inclined to put this differently.
I might be inclined to put this differently.
- sf105
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
[quote="Bach5G"]“ Add it all up and there are an awfully large number of pigs feeding at the trough.”
I might be inclined to put this differently.[/quote]
Exactly. Given that most everyone working at the Met will be at the top of their profession. But one of the problems is the huge cost of living in New York. That's one of the reasons the salaries have to be so high.
I might be inclined to put this differently.[/quote]
Exactly. Given that most everyone working at the Met will be at the top of their profession. But one of the problems is the huge cost of living in New York. That's one of the reasons the salaries have to be so high.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
[quote="sf105"]<QUOTE author="Bach5G" post_id="144014" time="1616291635" user_id="2999">
“ Add it all up and there are an awfully large number of pigs feeding at the trough.”
I might be inclined to put this differently.[/quote]
Exactly. Given that most everyone working at the Met will be at the top of their profession. But one of the problems is the huge cost of living in New York. That's one of the reasons the salaries have to be so high.
</QUOTE>
All 3000 employees? Let's say 200 of them are musicians (probably too many) and another 200 are the best stage hands who have ever lived (again, that seems like an awful lot of stage crew... But they actually have 800!!!). Maybe they have 200 ballerinas on staff, also at the top of their game. Chuck in 100 wardrobe people. Heck, let's say there are even 100 librarians/coaches/agents/lawyers all of which are necessary for music organizations and who need to be very specialized. Give each of these 1400 skilled people a bare bones NYC salary of $100K and you're at $140M before you've paid anyone else. Under normal conditions, the musicians and especially the section chairs would be expecting a much larger salary than that, along with most of these other skilled people.
What are the other X2200X ... 1600 employees at the top of their game at? Buffet coordination? Bruce hit on something at least - there are far too many employees for that organization to be called efficient, and there are much deeper issues at work than the initial OP and outcry would suggest.
It's not that just the musicians aren't being paid, it's more of "how was anyone getting paid to begin with? And why are management (sic) still being paid?"
“ Add it all up and there are an awfully large number of pigs feeding at the trough.”
I might be inclined to put this differently.[/quote]
Exactly. Given that most everyone working at the Met will be at the top of their profession. But one of the problems is the huge cost of living in New York. That's one of the reasons the salaries have to be so high.
</QUOTE>
All 3000 employees? Let's say 200 of them are musicians (probably too many) and another 200 are the best stage hands who have ever lived (again, that seems like an awful lot of stage crew... But they actually have 800!!!). Maybe they have 200 ballerinas on staff, also at the top of their game. Chuck in 100 wardrobe people. Heck, let's say there are even 100 librarians/coaches/agents/lawyers all of which are necessary for music organizations and who need to be very specialized. Give each of these 1400 skilled people a bare bones NYC salary of $100K and you're at $140M before you've paid anyone else. Under normal conditions, the musicians and especially the section chairs would be expecting a much larger salary than that, along with most of these other skilled people.
What are the other X2200X ... 1600 employees at the top of their game at? Buffet coordination? Bruce hit on something at least - there are far too many employees for that organization to be called efficient, and there are much deeper issues at work than the initial OP and outcry would suggest.
It's not that just the musicians aren't being paid, it's more of "how was anyone getting paid to begin with? And why are management (sic) still being paid?"
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
IN the 2018-19 season the Met produced 26 different operas with 4 or 5 in rotation in one week, often with two different operas in the same day.
That's a lot to manage and build and herd into the right place at the right time.
You could do that with fewer people if they were all working 14 hour days and seven day weeks but you couldn't do that for long.
That's a lot to manage and build and herd into the right place at the right time.
You could do that with fewer people if they were all working 14 hour days and seven day weeks but you couldn't do that for long.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
Well, not when you're giving $3.5 million to an alleged pedophile a year after you've fired him for it (cheaper than court, I guess?), and not paying your employees (cheaper than paying them?), no. Couldn't keep up with that for long at all.
Surely 800 stage hands is enough, right? That's enough for 100 stage crew per show, working only two or three days a week. What are the other 55% of the staff doing though, who aren't directly involved in productions?
Surely 800 stage hands is enough, right? That's enough for 100 stage crew per show, working only two or three days a week. What are the other 55% of the staff doing though, who aren't directly involved in productions?
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
Also remember that things need to be rehearsed. Lighting cues need to be set and timed. Costumes need to be made and change logistics set. Scenery needs to be built. Scenery changes need to be designed and rehearsed. Set props and personal props need to be procured.
All this takes time and manpower that isn't "salable". There's a lot more to an opera performance than the stuff you get to see. I saw a little of this since I was Stage Manager of my college theater.
All this takes time and manpower that isn't "salable". There's a lot more to an opera performance than the stuff you get to see. I saw a little of this since I was Stage Manager of my college theater.
- CalgaryTbone
- Posts: 1460
- Joined: May 10, 2018
[quote="harrisonreed"]Well, not when you're giving $3.5 million to an alleged pedophile a year after you've fired him for it (cheaper than court, I guess?), and not paying your employees (cheaper than paying them?), no. Couldn't keep up with that for long at all.
Surely 800 stage hands is enough, right? That's enough for 100 stage crew per show, working only two or three days a week. What are the other 55% of the staff doing though, who aren't directly involved in productions?[/quote]
The productions at the Met are among the most elaborate in the world. Multiple scene changes in every performance, and remember, they are doing different operas within every single week. 8 performances every week, but that is likely 4 different operas or more. The same opera can't be done too many times in the same week or consecutively for the sake of singers who need to rest voices between performances. They have stage hands who literally work all night to reset for the next performance - those people are obviously not working the next day. Operas are long - some performances run from 7PM to 12AM, so again it would be a different crew setting up in the next morning.
I don't think the Met's problems are particularly "business model" related (they've been doing this for well over 100 years, and other major opera companies like La Scala, Vienna, Covent Garden have similar numbers of employees). I think their recent problems are more tied to their front office leadership, who hasn't been popular with the public either for some of the programming and the choices of major singers.
The lack of big government support is tough, but those documents show significant donations of approximately $100,000 in the last 2 years on record. They draw that kind of support regularly.
Jim Scott
Surely 800 stage hands is enough, right? That's enough for 100 stage crew per show, working only two or three days a week. What are the other 55% of the staff doing though, who aren't directly involved in productions?[/quote]
The productions at the Met are among the most elaborate in the world. Multiple scene changes in every performance, and remember, they are doing different operas within every single week. 8 performances every week, but that is likely 4 different operas or more. The same opera can't be done too many times in the same week or consecutively for the sake of singers who need to rest voices between performances. They have stage hands who literally work all night to reset for the next performance - those people are obviously not working the next day. Operas are long - some performances run from 7PM to 12AM, so again it would be a different crew setting up in the next morning.
I don't think the Met's problems are particularly "business model" related (they've been doing this for well over 100 years, and other major opera companies like La Scala, Vienna, Covent Garden have similar numbers of employees). I think their recent problems are more tied to their front office leadership, who hasn't been popular with the public either for some of the programming and the choices of major singers.
The lack of big government support is tough, but those documents show significant donations of approximately $100,000 in the last 2 years on record. They draw that kind of support regularly.
Jim Scott
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
I think their recent problems are more tied to their front office leadership...
One recurring argument I see online, but am not sure of the validity of, is that the HD theater-cast availability has cut into their ticket sales.
If you live in the boroughs or Long Island or New Jersey and you can see it "live" at a movie theater for $20, would you still trek all the way to Manhattan to see an opera for $100?
- sf105
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mar 24, 2018
[quote="robcat2075"]<QUOTE>I think their recent problems are more tied to their front office leadership...[/quote]
One recurring argument I see online, but am not sure of the validity of, is that the HD theater-cast availability has cut into their ticket sales.
If you live in the boroughs or Long Island or New Jersey and you can see it "live" at a movie theater for $20, would you still trek all the way to Manhattan to see an opera for $100?
</QUOTE>
er, yes. I prefer to avoid a floor sticky from spilled sodas and a sound system designed for superhero movies. Nowadays, I suspect streaming at home is a bigger challenge. If I were further away, I might not do the whole overnight trip any more, though, because it's become so expensive.
But perhaps a bigger problem is that high art has become even more of an elite activity in the US, and is sold as something that comes after a dinner with silver candelabra. And the Met is too large and too conservative to attract the new generation. In a better world, instead of taking it out on the staff, they'd be looking to reset the whole enterprise.
S
One recurring argument I see online, but am not sure of the validity of, is that the HD theater-cast availability has cut into their ticket sales.
If you live in the boroughs or Long Island or New Jersey and you can see it "live" at a movie theater for $20, would you still trek all the way to Manhattan to see an opera for $100?
</QUOTE>
er, yes. I prefer to avoid a floor sticky from spilled sodas and a sound system designed for superhero movies. Nowadays, I suspect streaming at home is a bigger challenge. If I were further away, I might not do the whole overnight trip any more, though, because it's become so expensive.
But perhaps a bigger problem is that high art has become even more of an elite activity in the US, and is sold as something that comes after a dinner with silver candelabra. And the Met is too large and too conservative to attract the new generation. In a better world, instead of taking it out on the staff, they'd be looking to reset the whole enterprise.
S
- TomRiker
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Jul 14, 2020
Looks to me from the article that the Met is using this as an opportunity to reduce the permanent salaries of all their union employees including the musicians. They are dangling these temporary salaries as a carrot to get them to bargain.
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
[quote="sf105"]er, yes. I prefer to avoid a floor sticky from spilled sodas...[/quote]
But for those of us who prefer to spill our sodas, the theater is the clear choice.
But for those of us who prefer to spill our sodas, the theater is the clear choice.
- BGuttman
- Posts: 7368
- Joined: Mar 22, 2018
[quote="robcat2075"]<QUOTE author="sf105" post_id="144124" time="1616436958" user_id="173">
er, yes. I prefer to avoid a floor sticky from spilled sodas...[/quote]
But for those of us who prefer to spill our sodas, the theater is the clear choice.
</QUOTE>
Plus, it's quite a drive from Texas to New York City. My wife has a subscription to the Met. She arranges for all her operas to be within 1 week, drives to New York and stays at a hotel, and overdoses on Met. Does this twice a year. She also subscribes to the Live Casts, which are done in a theater only a few miles from here. I don't join her because it interferes with my musical activities around here.
As to using this as a sledge hammer to try to reduce salaries, it won't be the first time this has been tried. If the Met management had their way everybody would be a contractor working for minimum wage.
er, yes. I prefer to avoid a floor sticky from spilled sodas...[/quote]
But for those of us who prefer to spill our sodas, the theater is the clear choice.
</QUOTE>
Plus, it's quite a drive from Texas to New York City. My wife has a subscription to the Met. She arranges for all her operas to be within 1 week, drives to New York and stays at a hotel, and overdoses on Met. Does this twice a year. She also subscribes to the Live Casts, which are done in a theater only a few miles from here. I don't join her because it interferes with my musical activities around here.
As to using this as a sledge hammer to try to reduce salaries, it won't be the first time this has been tried. If the Met management had their way everybody would be a contractor working for minimum wage.
- harrisonreed
- Posts: 6479
- Joined: Aug 17, 2018
You guys don't realize that those sodas aren't spilled -- no one is foolishly dropping their sodas on the floor. They are
enthusiastically throwing them at the screen during the HD opera shows when they realize they aren't in the showing of Spiderman 28.
You say opera is high art, but soda throwing should be part of it!
<YOUTUBE id="ORpIfsPa1TY">[media]https://youtu.be/ORpIfsPa1TY</YOUTUBE>
enthusiastically throwing them at the screen during the HD opera shows when they realize they aren't in the showing of Spiderman 28.
You say opera is high art, but soda throwing should be part of it!
<YOUTUBE id="ORpIfsPa1TY">
- robcat2075
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Sep 03, 2018
At the Dallas Opera you're allowed to bring drinks into the theater, but it's mostly petite little alcoholic ones.