Increase Web Presence by Tagging Photos - A How To

Short and simple, this one.  And it may be overly basic to some and absolutely revelatory to others.  It's one of those things I frequently forget to do and then curse the sky after hitting "post."

Images and video are incredible tools for engaging audiences and clients.  They're some of the most powerful tools you have.  But they don't reach out to anyone as images (people have to stumble upon them).  Search engines don't scan and categorize images, they scan the metadata connected to it. So before you post a single image (or video) on the web, open up the properties and add identifying information!  It looks like this:

Here's a master class tip: never over "tag" a picture, post, etc.  Search engines weight each tag equally, so if you have too many it just dilutes the searchability.  Only use 3-4 tags.

Innovative Marketing for Theatre

This, mate, might be more of a question than an answer.  We've just released a new video for our production of Jerusalem at the Phoenix.  It's both an innovative way to market the show, and a practical tool for helping audiences understand the thick British slang that pervades the play and sets the mood.  We wanted something light, fun, engaging, and informal-- that would get you inside not the world of the play so much as the world of the actors.  With the help of Hurricane Images Inc., heere's what we did:

In comparison to other theatre companies, I'd say Second Wind operates on a shoe string.  We make amazing things happen on almost nothing.  Theatre is, after all, primarily an exercise of imagination.  The audience knows the action is a fiction, but suspend their disbelief to to allow their imaginations to journey on a rollercoaster of emotion and thought.

Over the past two decades, we've let our imagination explore a whole range of innovative, inexpensive marketing adventures.  Guerilla marketing, by another name.  How to get butts in seats tends to be one of those guarded secrets in the theatre world (like marketing budgets).  So let's let the cat out of the bag.

Most of the time it's hard to say whether a marketing technique is effective.  The metrics aren't there for a good evaluation, and there are typically complex variables.  I could talk for a long time about what worked and didn't work about each of these, but instead I'm going to give it a simple "grade" for effectiveness. If you want me to explain why I gave a specific tool a certain grade, leave me a post.

Post Show Discussions. I've included this because it's something you can promote and advertise beyond the show.  We've done a number-- critic from the SF Chronicle for our production of Ghost in the Light about art forgeries; Israeli Consultate/MoveOn.org/Jewish Voice for Peace for our production of Murder; GMO activist Pamm Larry for Lullaby Tree.  The effective score varies, largely based on how controversial the play topic; the more controversial the better. The score is a range:  D-B

Wallet Drop. For A Beautiful Home for the Incurable will bought five used wallets, filled them with the fake I.D. of one of the play characters, and a message informing the "finder" that they had just won a free ticket to the show if they return the wallet.  We dropped five in various locations, one "returned." Score: C+

Played 3 Card Monty at the Tix Booth.  Almost got kicked out of the square on this one, but we set up a 3-Card Monty game in front of the SF Tix Booth for our production of Top Dog/Underdog. The game is played in the show.  Dressed as the character (a black-faced Lincoln) we challenged people waiting in line to play; winner received a free concessions voucher.  Score B-.

Art Contest. For Ghost in the Light we conducted a "forgery" contest at the three major art schools in SF. Winner received tickets to the show, their work displayed in the lobby, and they joined the panel discussion with the SF Chronicle critic.  Score C+

Behind the Scenes Video. We do this constantly.  We photograph rehearsals and put them into video, and  film special activities related to the video.  Wander around this blog and you'll see what I mean.  Score B

Post on Related Forums.  There are forums for everything.  For The Tender King we engaged in conversations on World War II history forums (the play dealt with Truman's decision to drop the bomb).  Score D

Elite Pass. For two of our productions we created an Elite Pass that would give members special privileges:  frree drinks, free returns, half-price youth ticket, and a workshop.  Score (B-)

Dress Up a Car. For several shows I've gotten a big magnet sticker for the side of my car.  Costs about $25.  But for The Woman in Black I went all out.  The sticker featured a hand coming out of a grave; a severed hand appeared in the window as a continuation.  It was October, and the show is a ghost story.  Got some looks.  Score C+

For comparison, I'll give my scores on some traditional marketing tools: Twitter (C-), Facebook (B), Youtube (B), Google Adwords (C-), Facebook ads (C), Posters (C+)

You'll notice nothing scored higher than a "B". That's because none of them beat word of mouth, building an audience base, email, and postcards.  Part of the "genius" of the Jerusalem video is that its designed to get the cast and crew-- who are a part of that word-of-mouth system-- excited about the show.  And it can be "re-used" on multiple platforms.

But these are just some of the things we've done around untraditional marketing.  What have you done?  Share an idea.  Join the conversation.

Anticipation, Captivation, and Impact

Last year, Theatre Bay Area sponsored a study on the impact of theatre on audiences, and how that related to satisfaction and customer loyalty.  In many respects, the study didn’t reveal much that practitioners didn’t already know from experience; nonetheless, it is a largely unstudied relationship, which makes their work both interesting and commendable.  They published their results, albeit without some of the most compelling figures (statistics, people, we want raw numbers!).  For instance, they report that women were more likely to be the “deciders” on going to the theatre—picking the plays and purchasing the tickets—but don’t reveal the stats behind that statement, the percentage of women deciders versus men, (let alone its statistical significance).

They did produce a nifty chart summarizing their findings. The diagram “illustrates key relationships between readiness, impact and loyalty, based on the totality of the data set.”  To fully understand it, pay close attention to the "R Squared" value that shows the ability of one factor to influence or predict another.

 

One of the interesting take-aways is the suggestion that knowing the story before  going to the theatre adds to both the anticipation and overall emotional impact.  Anticipation by itself (R squared = .16) didn’t lead to greater impact; finding the production “captivating,” naturally, lead to both deeper impact and greater likelihood that they would recommend the play to others.

One way to interpret these findings is to tell more of the play's story in your marketing material-- don't be coy.  That, apparently, helps get people to the theatre. You'll still need a great show to make them come back, though.

Now the study would really have been complete if they looked at how these elements correlated to alcohol consumption. 

Disappearance of Mary Rosemary Photo Shoot in 60 Seconds

Last week I met with three of our actors for our pre-press photo session.  We'll do a second round of press and archival photos after the show is up.  For a change of pace, I decided to do time-lapse video of the set up and shoot....

Hop on the Goldstar Poverty Train

Okay, I’ve complained about this before. 

 Sustainability has always been a struggle for theatre companies, regardless of their size.  The threats to long life as a company, are constantly evolving.  Ten years ago, who would have thought “instant entertainment” in the form of downloadable movies and music would be an obstacle to filling our seats?  Goldstar’s role in our eco system has also evolved.  Initially, the half-price giant was largely positive—allowing companies to reach out to new audiences and fill empty chairs.  But as they’ve become one of the primary ways that people purchase tickets—and as they’ve evolved from a “half-price” vendor to a “half price… or maybe we’ll just give away our inventory because we’re desperate” huckster, their effect on sustainability has become perilous.

Take their recent “Comp Train” campaign.  While companies are faced with increased economic hazards—from a weak financial system to the lure of instant, nearly free entertainment—Goldstar decided the remedy was a special “comp” ticket giveaway.  I place “comp” in quotes because companies are providing comps, but Goldstar is selling them at a mark-up higher than what they’d normally get for the ticket.  It’s not enough that companies can, at any given moment, decide to sell comp tickets; no, Goldstar has now created a special event to do so, pitting those companies who already offer 50% off tickets against those willing to drink the Cool Aide financially.

 

Goldstar will say that they’re simply encouraging new sales and opportunities for these companies:  people who might not normally see your show will.  This is wholly disingenuous.  The lure for companies isn’t new customers or relief from an empty house, and Goldstar knows it.  The reason to contribute comp tickets is so to raise your position on the weekly email blast, and the possibility of being named a “hot ticket” in their second, weekly email.  This puts companies in the position of not competing for customers, or awareness, but for preferential treatment by Goldstar.  Give us freebies and we’ll work a little harder for you.  In other situations, this would be called a bribe.

I don’t like to “complain” without providing solutions, so I’ll offer some.  First for Goldstar:  stop doing these ridiculous comp train promotions and discourage the use of comp tickets through you.  Second, stop ordering the events in your email by popularity; randomize them.  Customer reviews are sufficient for buyers interested in popularity—promote all shows equally.  And finally, stop re-writing event descriptions.  It homogenizes them and you aren’t as familiar with the show as the promoter is, nor have you spent as much time considering how to market it...and frankly, you’re not that good at writing copy.

What can companies do?  First, demand these changes if you agree with them.  How do you demand?  Simply:  talk about it—to Goldstar, amongst yourselves, and your customers.  And second, never stop diversifying your audience base.  Performance arts are ultimately about community.  Even Broadway shows are somewhat based on this dynamics of community:  The Lion King has a position in the community, in people’s minds, and there is a certain type of person that goes to the show.  Goldstar’s system discourages community building.  You don’t get their contact info; they don’t find your show through your website; they don’t leave their feedback with you, but with Goldstar.  You need to build your own.

 

 

Is Goldstar Killing Small Theatre?

I’m pretty sure I’m not the only producer who’s asked this question.  I’ve listened to a few who have deepened my understanding of the complex concerns:  Do half-price tickets devalue our work?  Do they teach customers to only buy discounted tickets? Does it make our work “accessible?”  Does it change theatre as a “public benefit” (and therefore worthy of grant support) into theatre as “cut-rate entertainment?” Can companies survive in this economic eco-system?


I started this article several months ago and delayed posting because I didn’t want to be perceived a “complainer;” I debated, dallied, and then discovered a new, even more disturbing aspect of my Goldstar experience.  Namely, that Goldstar was becoming less and less effective at selling my tickets, while at the same time offering more ways for me to gouge myself while increasing their profit margin.  I finally concluded that I was engineering the demise of my own theatre company.  Here’s how:

SWEET BEGINNINGS
Goldstar started as a great way to reach new customers.  With the decline of print newspapers, Goldstar has increasingly become the way my “potential audience” finds me.  Goldstar is, after all, a much more efficient place to find entertainment information than the alternatives in San Francisco (I can’t even find my own listing on SFGATE.COM half the time).  And they offer a media rich environment, complete with images, quotes, descriptions, reviews, and video.  All this sounds great, except that it’s quietly bleeding me into bankruptcy.  And if you run a theatre company—big or small—I believe they’ll get you, too.


Chances are you choose your ticket prices very carefully.  It’s an intricate balance between costs, perceived worth, mission, and audience demographics.  A couple of years ago I noticed that many theatres raised their prices rather suddenly.  Producers readily admitted it was to defray the losses from their half-price tickets sales. 


Theatre is one of the few products with almost no profit margin; if you count deficits from unsold seats—which is very similar to an unsold pint of milk, an item good for a limited period of time (in this case, a night)—then most small theatres operate at a loss—even considering foundation support.  They survive on donations of time and money.  This is true when the customer pays full price.  As more of our customers purchase tickets through Goldstar, it’s only natural that companies inflate the cost of their “regular” ticket to compensate.  I can name half a dozen companies in San Francisco that have done so.  I’ve watched Second Wind’s Goldstar sales rocket from 15% of our total tickets to 70%, so I’ll start with my own company: yes, we raised our prices to off-set half-price sales.


But inflating the cost of your regular ticket has other consequences.  If you have a subscriber base, they may suddenly find they’re paying far more than the person seated next to them.  This can undermine their willingness to subscribe, and companies lose that season-long commitment and connection.  And what about audience members who are unaware of Goldstar?  Now, theatre tickets seem rather steep, rather elitist.  But chances are, they’re not steep enough to cover your losses.  Most companies don’t have the heart to raise their prices by 100%, or even 50%.  But if your half-price ticket sales jumped from 15% to 70%, that’s exactly how much you’ll need to raise prices to cover the difference.


Consider who buys theatre tickets at full price nowadays.  Most often it’s the older couple who loves your matinee, the stalwart never-say-die supporter of your company, or an individual who has stumbled across a favorable review.  These are customers you cannot afford to alienate.  Now consider what a ten or twenty dollar increase in the ticket price might mean for them—first in attending the show, then to enjoying it, and finally to making it a habit.  By raising your prices to off-set your Goldstar losses, you’ve endangered an important segment of your audience.


But we’re increasing our Goldstar audience, right?  I mean, Second Wind’s audience from Goldstar.  Wait, who’s audience is it?  Goldstar dictates the terms in which we have access to them (50% off for the regular list; 60%-80% off for the Today Only; 100% off for a guaranteed Roar listing).  Goldstar keeps their contact info.  And on Monday morning, do they say I saw this great show by Second Wind, or on Goldstar?  Chances are it can go either way.  So can I really claim them as my audience?


THE NEW KILLER OPTIONS
Then came the truly troubling bit for me:  When we listed our last show, Vigilance, on Goldstar our ticket sales were initially flat.  Dead in the water.  Ten days went by and we barely sold a dozen tickets.  So we opted for the “Today Only” special. To qualify, we had to offer 75 tickets (regularly priced $20-25) for $5, and 75 tickets for $7.50.  This was in addition to 150 half-price ticket offerings.  It jump-started our sales, but it made me realize something terrifying: GOLDSTAR COULD NO LONGER SELL MY SHOW AT HALF PRICE.  Their customers were so hopped up on the sugar of 60%-80% discounts that half-off no longer satisfied.  It wasn’t that people weren’t interested in seeing the show.  They were simply addicted to better “discounts”… and they had no attachment to my show or my company. Goldstar had taken steps to separate them from us.  In truth, we sold a fair amount of tickets for the show.  We got superb professional reviews: the San Francisco Examiner called Vigilance “a winner… gripping, thought-provoking, substantive.”  Other newspaper reviews pretty much echoed the Examiner’s opinion.  We also got very good customer reviews— an average of 4.5 stars.  Nonetheless, two weeks later our sales flat-lined again.  There were better deals to be had. 


Sort of.  You see Goldstar charged a $4.75 fee on my $5 ticket.  Customers were still only getting about half-price.  They saved twenty-five cents on our $10 discount ticket and $3.25 on our more expensive weekend offer.  Our sales were jump-started by the deal because customers were being hoodwinked by flashy advertising and the illusion of an amaaaaaazing deal.  All in all, Second Wind made about $1523 from our first two weeks of ticket sales; Goldstar made an estimated $648*.  That’s 42% in fees.  We did all the work; we took the risks; we suffered a financial loss on the show.  They charged us for “credit card processing” on top of their fees to customers.  And the deeper we cut our prices, the bigger the fee they added to customers.

As producers we, too, have to keep our eye out for that hoodwink.  Because our deal isn’t actually what we think, either.  Imagine for a moment that you’re a farmer—and that for every bushel of apples you sell, you have to burn another bushel that you’ve painstakingly grown in your field.  Now look at your ticket sales: for every ticket you sold through Goldstar, they had you spend an equal number of dollars into advertising.  If you sold 100 tickets at half price and brought in $1,000 in revenue, then you gave up $1,000 on those ticket earnings on that seat.  The only difference is you weren’t charged up front for the advertising.  That’s why you don’t notice it.  So would you rather spend a grand on advertising to bring in $2K in tickets, actively promote your company’s identity, and obtain your audience’s contact info?  The answer isn’t an easy “yes,” because there’s no guarantee on that income.  You could spend a grand and bring in only $1300 in tickets.  And that’s the magical allure of half-price ticket vendors: you pay only for your successes.  But the truth is, for every $10 ticket sale, we’re still burning $10 off the regular price; money Goldstar used to advertise/promote your show. 


A two-to-one ratio** of sale income to advertising dollars is pretty poor business practice; it only works if the product has a greater than 100% mark-up.  We don’t.  Do you?


WHO’S MY CRITIC?
Don’t get me wrong:  I’m all for customer reviews.  I think they’re great.  In terms of generating sales they are often more powerful than “professional” reviews.  But they should never take the place of them. 


Customer reviews are great for promoting (or preventing) ticket revenue.  Professional reviews may not generate mass sales, but they are vital for developing a strong community, for marketing efforts, and for grant writing.  They’re also good for the artists—actors, writers, directors, and designers who rely on these types of reviews to draw attention to their work.  Good customer reviews have great short-term benefits; good professional reviews have great long-term benefits. 


Readership of arts pages in print and electronic newspapers is in decline, and it’s a cyclical demise.  Increasingly, publishers are faced with budget woes from declining readership, and arts writers often fall victim to shrinking budgets.  When that happens, the arts community not only loses a consistent, learned voice, but the lay-offs often coincide with reduced coverage.  Reduced—and therefore incomplete—coverage means that readers look elsewhere for their arts news.  Fewer readers result in diminished advertising sales for the paper, resulting in more budget woes.  In the end, this hurts theatre companies and the community.  If audiences begin to rely more on customer reviews than professional, we’re engineering a different type of problem for ourselves as artists.


ECO SUM
Currently, the Goldstar system is gradually engineering lower ticket prices—and thus lower overall sales— while undercutting small theatre’s ability to develop a subscriber base and connect with customers.  By filling the ever-increasing gaps in newspaper coverage, they are inadvertently hastening their demise, as well undermining our long-term benefits.  Large theatre companies are less affected by these issues because they have bigger houses, and tiered seating arrangements offer some degree of protection. But I predict that they too be caught in a Catch 22 scenario: as their subscriber base opt for half-price and patrons become accustomed to never paying for a regular ticket, they will see a gradual decline in full price sales and long-term patronage. 


Let’s be honest.  Some companies are in the position where Goldstar is helpful.  Others find that their service helps some shows but hurts others.  Better known plays have a sure advantage over new work within this system; the same is true for better known companies.  The damage done isn’t black or white, something clearly and immediately evident.  But my crystal ball says sooner or later they’ll undermine everyone’s financial base, regardless of their company’s size.  They are not TKTS or TBA’s Tix Booth.  Those are alternative half-priced systems in an eco-system that supports full priced tickets.  Goldstar is dramatically changing the theatre eco-system in San Francisco.


WHAT TO DO?
So how do we revive it?  First, we need to devise ways to regain our connection with our audiences; to cut out the middle-man bent on making us dependent.  Offering incentives for people to join your mailing list is great, but it actually doesn’t get them to purchase tickets through you at a fair price.  They can still look for your show on Goldstar.  So educating them about what it means to buy a half-price ticket is vital.


Second, figure out a way to tier your ticket sales.  Small companies are used to a “one-price” general admission system.  If you have two prices, you can use Goldstar for the more expensive ticket.  But your upper tier offer has to be honestly, and significantly, different.  Don’t cheat your audience in attempt to manipulate Goldstar.
Third, if you work in theatre, call up the company that’s offering Goldstar tickets and ask for discount directly from them.  Give them an opportunity to connect to you.


Over the past three years, our source of income at Second Wind has shifted dramatically.  At the same time, our overall income has remained about the same.  We consistently sell slightly more tickets for each show (which may be a victory in these lean years); but they are more often half-priced tickets.  We plan to explore several different options to reduce our income from—and dependency on—Goldstar.  I have no doubt it will have severe financial repercussions, at least in the short-run.  But I’m also fairly sure Goldstar—in its current form—will kill my company.  By striving to become the Amazon.com of entertainment, their frenzied, bargain-basement approach has ravaged the frail eco-system of theatre.  Instead, they’ve become the Walmart of entertainment.  And we’ve helped them.


Goldstar and Jim McCarthy (their CEO) don’t have to be the villains in the piece.  (Neil Patrick Harris, help ‘em out, would ya?  You’re on the board, now.)  There are ways they can help— three very simple things they could do that would support our growth rather than damage it, and it wouldn’t cost them a penny. 


First, allow companies to set the amount of reduction.  Rather than a blanket 50% or more, let the supplier choose its rate.  Require something, not everything.  Customers are smart enough to work out what’s meaningful.  That’s the number one thing Goldstar can do.  Goldstar calculates their fees based on the full price, so it wouldn’t harm their overhead. 


Empowering producers to set their own rates won’t mean anything, of course, as long as Goldstar creates competition between those willing to slash their ticket prices by more than 50% with those trying to sell the “regular” Goldstar price—so they have to stop pitting the desperate against the more desperate.  No more “Today Only” specials—that’s number two.  Instead, they should promote everyone equally. 

And finally, be transparent on what Goldstar makes from each event.  Don’t just report my income; report yours.  Credit cards report on interest collected; phone companies report on taxes and fees.  Report your revenue from my event.  If 42% is a percentage you don’t want to advertise, then don’t charge that much.


Customers, understand that after the service fee you only saved, on average, 29% on your ticket. Yes, having your entertainment options delivered to you on a single, engrossing website is attractive, but decide whether that’s worth being less supportive of the company.  After all, we’re only one click away from the website you’re looking at.


Oh, and Goldstar:  stop charging me a credit card processing fee, ya douche.  That should come out of your cut.

* Since Goldstar doesn't report their fees, you have to look at the amount at point of purchase, and then calculate based on your ticket sales
** If your full price ticket is $20, then you spend $10 in advertising by using a half-price vender.

Four Ways Were Changing Our Relationship to Our Audience

Transforming our Lobby into a Lounge. Utilizing QR Codes in our program. Opening the bar after the show. Initiating an Elite Pass for the production. Here’s why:

Transforming our lobby

We’ve got a small lobby—it has room for maybe four chairs, and is separated from the theatre by a curtain. It’s not the best of circumstances, and it often requires us to set up folding chairs in the hallway outside the lobby to accommodate early arrivals and overflow. In the past we’ve done things to spruce up our “inner” lobby: lit candles, projected images high up on the walls, filled the space with old show posters, and offered free hot chocolate (that was a big hit). But it still says, “wait here a minute, the real entertainment soon.” It’s a “waiting room.” Why am I telling audience members not to engage in conversation? Not to connect? Not to enjoy themselves? So we’re moving comfy furniture into the lobby and even the outer hallway.

QR Codes

You know, that funny little black and white square with dark speckles in it. If your smartphone has the right app, you can take a picture of it and visit a website or see a short video. Like a lot of marketing innovations it’s become all the rage without a whole lot of evaluation, but I figure within the setting of a theatre auditorium having one person use the QR code gets 2-5 neighbors in on the fun. Want to hear an actor talk about his role? Hear the playwright’s description of the play? Get clues on who done it? All they have to do is open their program, point and click.

Open the Bar

People tend to flee the theater after the show, even if they enjoyed the show. That’s cool. But we also want people to talk about the show and engage with the art form. So even if the attendance doesn’t merit it, we’ll be keeping the bar open after the show and inviting folks to chat with the artists.

The New Elite Pass

Make theatre more than a business transaction of dollars for stage entertainment—that’s what this new program is about. We’re encouraging people to get involved not just for two hours, but two months by offering inside looks, workshops, right of return, discounted food and drink. For just $35, the price of many shows in SF, you get a whole experience. It’s our new adventure. For everyone involved. And frankly, we think it's the most intimate theatre experience in the nation. Check it out at www.secondwind.8m.com/AboutElite.html

So come tell us how we did.
Vigilance runs February 2nd thru the 25th at The Phoenix Theatre.

2nd Wind's 5 Most Useful Posts for Producers, Directors, & Designers

Second Wind’s blog has posted over 60 entries into our behind-the-scenes diary over the past four years. So we’ve decided to cull the best of our resources and guides for producers, directors, and designers (sorry actors, you’ll have to wait your turn). Here they are:

Your Design Portfolio / Getting Hired
Advice from the pros and tips for sealing the deal. Get hired as a designer.
http://secondwindtheatre.blogspot.com/2011/12/your-design-portfolio-getting-hired.html

Strategic Marketing Plan for Theatre
We lay out our complete marketing plan for The Tender King, no holds barred. How does yours compare?
http://secondwindtheatre.blogspot.com/2010/11/my-least-favorite-thing-about-producing.html

Starting a Visual/Emotional Palette
You’re a director—what do you know about design? Help on using visuals to hone your directorial work, and communicate better with designers.
http://secondwindtheatre.blogspot.com/2010/03/starting-visual-emotional-palette.html

Taking the Press Photo
We share our top six tips for a knock-out press photo.
http://secondwindtheatre.blogspot.com/2010/03/starting-visual-emotional-palette.html

Ah Paperwork!
Nobody likes it; everybody’s got to do it. No, I’m not talking about death— I’m talking about paperwork. We share some of our more useful examples of forms for producing, including press releases, contracts for designers/actors, rehearsal forms, marketing tools, etc.
http://secondwindtheatre.blogspot.com/2008/11/ah-paperwork.html

And a bonus... Mastering the Art of the Question

Directors are forbidden to give "line readings" and for good reason. Telling an actor exactly what you want is a sure-fire way of creating an awkward, unconvincing performance. There are a number of ways to "guide" a performance; the most effective technique is about asking the right questions that create a common viewpoint. And it cannot be practiced-- or utilized-- enough.

http://secondwindtheatre.blogspot.com/2010/03/mastering-art-of-question.html

Press Photos... Step One

At Second Wind we use a two-step process for press photos (I don't think that's particularly uncommon, but it took me a while to accept it as natural). To be honest, we don't do our first round of photos as extensively, or as early as we probably should. The truly ambitious shoot their photos three months in advance. The idea behind early photos is to have visuals ready to promote the show for monthly publications. However, shooting photos that far ahead of opening feels so disjointed and inorganic to me that I've resisted. I'm not connected to the show yet; I may not even be cast yet let alone have images in my head. So we take time out during our first week of rehearsals to shoot just a handful of shots that we can use.

Since I haven't staged anything yet, I refer to my "visual palette" for ideas-- I wrote a blog on it here. And I did a piece on elements of a successful press photo here. Today's entry is a behind-the-scenes ditty on the early press photos for The Tender King.

A tip for making your show images easier to find on the internet: Right click on the file, go into properties, and given each image a clear title, name, and tags. They're searchable.

Taking the Press Photo

The other day I was searching the web to find a good resource on how to take a good press photo. I found surprisingly little. So I thought I'd share a few of our learnings on marketing images and archival images-- and since it's a visual media, I've included many of ours from the past four productions. There's a difference between the press and the archival, which I discuss in the video, though I've used both the Vlog. The points I do my best to adhere to?
1. Shoot in color with at 300 dpi in the final image
2. Submit photos with strong contrasts
3. Play with angles and height
4. Place your subjects close together
5. Chose a moment that is dynamic and tells part of your story
6. A strong press photo should ask a question

Just 3 more performances of The Woman in Black! Grab your tickets now for the show Albert Goodwyn calls "taut, gripping suspense."

http://www.secondwindtheatre.com/

Does Twitter Work for Theatre Companies?

I’ve spent some time looking at this issue, and as you can see from the left hand side of my web page, I’ve subscribed to Twitter. Does it work? Is it a flash in the pan? Well, I want to hear your comments.

But I did do some research. According to PEW, the largest demographics of Twits are 18-34… no surprise there, really, though it is interesting to note that only 1% of Twits are under 18. They are overwhelming white (81%), and childless. Sadly, they tend to have less money. Equally distributed among men and women. And most do not have a graduate degree, though equally distributed between HS graduates and bachelor’s degrees.

Tuesday is the most active Tweet day, only 5% of accounts have more than 100 followers; 20% are never used.

Twits tend to sign up then drop their account: 60% last less than a month. The majority, about, 40% use it to keep in touch with friends; 28% use it as a pass-thru tool to update their status on social network sights such as facebook and their blogs; and about 25% use it for “news”. According to Linkedin (okay, maybe not the most stringent of researchers) only 8% of businesses view Twitter as a “very effective” marketing tool. (I tend to agree.) In fact, the main people touting the effectiveness of Twitter appear to be marketers themselves. How to effectively use social marketing is endless fodder for marketing individuals blogs, twits, and articles. But do people use Twitter to get info about what to see and do? Does it work? Who does it reach? If you’ve got a success story, leave a comment and tell us!

So if I’m not a fan, why am I doing it? Good question. First, I put a lot of time into researching it and setting up an account, so I’m planning on using it for a little while to get the full experience. Second, I’m wondering if the tips and tricks I’ve read will make a difference in my experience. Not everyone researches how to use a tool before they go out and start hammering. And third, sometimes a marketing campaign is designed towards depth, and sometimes towards breadth. We’re currently in a breadth mode, so even a handful of new contacts, relationships, and audience members are a victory. And we’re using it to create depth to our outreach: our twitter updates are focused on real tools, ideas, and inspirations rather than bland, reiterative marketing of current activities.

It's also important to consider your audience demographics and buying cycle. Is this your crowd? Do you want them to be? Tweats are very ephemeral-- they come and go as quick reminders with no lasting impression. But (perhaps) if timed to your audiences' buying cycle, the nudge can come at just the right time. As long as you don't overdo it and the twits become a nag. For that reason, I've focused http://twitter.com/2ndWindThtre away from our current show.

Through my Twitter research, I did find a few tips that I thought I’d share:

1. Don’t sell on twitter, engage
2. Follow and respond to other’s twits
3. If you don’t have any news, give them someone else’s
4. Update. Every other day is too little, 5x a day too much
5. Keep a notepad to write down twits for the future.
6. The number of followers is not as important as the quality: it’s social.
7. Have a goal and an identity for your twitter page, make a plan to reach it


How to Expand Your Following:
1. Post on your website and blog
2. Respond to someone else’s twit, they may start to follow yours
3. Put your twitter in the signature of your email

Do/Don't Review This

All of us want glowing reviews for our work. Professional reviews. We believe they will bring audiences and lasting recognition; we believe they will be useful in obtaining grants. Though we hold fast to our public assertions that we don’t need them for personal validation of our creative talents, we secretly covet the words when they glow. For the past few years my faith in these beliefs has waned. I’ve seen glowing reviews do nothing for audience attendance; I’ve grown to understand that the only thing that brings lasting recognition is consistent and continued quality in one’s work. And the eruption of audience reviews on sites like Goldstar Events and other places have shown themselves to have a more immediate impact on ticket sales that traditional reviews, even if I can’t attach them to a grant application or clip them to a play submission. I don’t mean to diminish the value of a professional opinion; I’m just recognizing its changing place in a changing world.

I was intrigued, then, when I learned of a controversial blog written by Melodie Bahan, the Director of Communications at the Guthrie Theater in Minneapolis, entitled “Don’t Review This”. She stressed that “too much emphasis has been placed on theater reviews to the detriment of arts. Does the average newspaper reader even skim – much less read – a review of the latest production from a small theater company she’s never heard of and has no intention of seeing? Probably not. But she might well read movie reviews and almost certainly reads feature stories about the movie industry, even if she sees only two or three movies a year. I believe it’s because, in part, newspapers provide stories about the film industry that explain and inform, yet provide little real coverage of the theater community in this town.”

In advocating for theatre “journalism” rather than reviews, Bahan wants coverage that gets inside of the theatre world, a look within productions, coverage that builds a sense of community between artists and audiences. I say "Amen" to that-- it's what this blog and our Twitter page (http://twitter.com/2ndWindTheatre) are all about, building a community. She goes on to write:

“The readers of the two major daily newspapers in this town would be better served by forgoing hastily-written, ill-considered snapshots of an opening night performance and focusing instead on actual journalistic coverage of the arts. I’m not against theater reviews; I’m against theater reviews that are poorly written, thumbs-up-or-down laundry lists of actors and designers that don’t do anything to illuminate the production or give readers a real sense of the experience.”

I don’t know if I agree completely with Bahan’s a solution to diminishing theatre reviews. I rarely read movie reviews and almost never skim feature acticles about the movie industry. But I’ll admit I’m intrigued. And it’s definitely worth some discussion. With reviewers been forced to critique productions in a hundred words or less, it's almost impossible to write something that illuminates the art of a single show. Consider how many artists contribute to a show: set, light, sound, costume, prop designers and graphic artists-- not to mention stage managers, tech operators (have you ever seen sloppily run lighting? it can ruin a show), directors, choreographers, and actors. You could fill a hundred words just placing names to occupations. More importantly, I think Bahan's article poses a question about the role of the reviewer. And that's a whole 'nother ball of wax.

You can read Bahan's full article at:
http://www.minnesotaplaylist.com/magazine/article/2009/02/01/dont-review

Selling the Complex Bundle called Theatre

THOUGHT FOR (TO)DAY

I ran across this article at The Artful Manager and thought it posed what is both a common and an important question for theatre producers. In true internet fashion, he is (of course) quoting someone else’s article. So in the “I am quoting he is quoting, we are quoting, quoting all together” spirit:

What, exactly, do you sell?

(From Andrew Taylor of The Artful Manager)

Doug McLennan provokes a rather central question in his Diacritical blog are arts organizations in the business of selling tickets? Says McLennan: “If you believe your business model is the classic consumer transaction (I make the performance, you buy the ticket) then you're done. Sorry. That's a Manufacturing Economy mindset, and while it worked when choices were limited, now that you're competing in the infinite marketplace.”

He goes on to suggest that arts organizations are providing a much more complex service than a play or a performance or an exhibition, and that arts consumers are seeking a complex bundle of goods in their purchase decisions.

“People aren't comparing you with other orchestras or theatre or dance companies; they're measuring whether classical music or theatre or dance is something they want to choose at the moment. They're deciding whether they want an active or passive experience; they're trying to determine what level of social encounter they feel like today. They're weighing whether they want a predictable, known, comfortable quantity or whether they want to be adventurous and try something new.”

His provocation is right on the mark, and central to any thoughtful discussion of the future of arts enterprise and cultural management. But I'd suggest that it's missing an important wrinkle. The deeper challenge for arts organizations is that they DO sell a product, even as they DON'T. That is, an important segment of any arts audience doesn't recognize the complex bundle they're seeking when they buy a symphony or theater ticket. They've come to use that event as a placeholder or proxy for that bundle, without even knowing it. To this core group (often the most passionate about the art form, the most loyal buyers, the most committed donors) the bundle IS the product. And as you innovate around the delivery or context of your creative work, you challenge their passionate connection to the discipline's tradition.

by Andrew Taylor

The idea of theatre as an experience greater than the sum of visual and auditory sensations—that there is an experience of community, that it is a social gathering as well as an event—and that it is not confined to the action upon the stage is one that I’ve pondered for quite a while. If anyone else has found ways to highlight, emphasize, and promote those aspects of the theatre experience, please leave us a comment and tell us about it.