# A look at the finances of Spider Man



## STEVETERRY (Jun 24, 2011)

For riveting reading:

A Look at the Finances of 'Spider-Man' - Document - NYTimes.com


----------



## derekleffew (Jun 24, 2011)

Some noteworthy take-off s:

> Electrics - preparation 289,700.00
> Electrics - perishables 157,682.48
> 
> Fees - creative
> ...


Now who wants to be a Lighting Designer?


----------



## tdrga (Jun 24, 2011)

Very interesting to see the breakdown of fees and labor, etc.

Over $1 million for scenic designer assistants... I wonder how many people that is?

-Todd


----------



## tdrga (Jun 24, 2011)

derekleffew said:


> Some noteworthy take-off s:
> 
> 
> Now who wants to be a Lighting Designer?


 
N.B. For a full 8 show week the LD royalty increases to $2500 (see the last page).

-Todd


----------



## rochem (Jun 24, 2011)

I don't understand - both the Associate Choreographer and the Associate LD were paid MORE than the people they were working. Is this normal? Is there some reason for why it was this way? I understand that Scenery had multiple people splitting that number, but from what I'm aware, Lighting and Choreography both only had one Associate (not to be confused with Assistant).


----------



## DuckJordan (Jun 24, 2011)

I'm betting they had more than just one in those positions.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk


----------



## soundlight (Jun 24, 2011)

rochem said:


> I don't understand - both the Associate Choreographer and the Associate LD were paid MORE than the people they were working. Is this normal? Is there some reason for why it was this way? I understand that Scenery had multiple people splitting that number, but from what I'm aware, Lighting and Choreography both only had one Associate (not to be confused with Assistant).


 
Look at the royalties - the designers receive the royalties, the associates don't. That's my understanding.


----------



## STEVETERRY (Jun 24, 2011)

rochem said:


> I don't understand - both the Associate Choreographer and the Associate LD were paid MORE than the people they were working. Is this normal? Is there some reason for why it was this way? I understand that Scenery had multiple people splitting that number, but from what I'm aware, Lighting and Choreography both only had one Associate (not to be confused with Assistant).


 
The associates and assistants sat in the theatre for more than 12 hours per day for more than year. The principal designers went off to do other stuff. I'm sure the assistants were being paid by the day, whereas the principals were on a flat fee.

ST


----------



## Esoteric (Jun 25, 2011)

Plus the Associates did all the plots, paperwork, renderings, drawings, sections, etc.

Not bad for the moving light programmer.


----------



## What Rigger? (Jun 25, 2011)

I think they got off pretty reasonably for the flying elements! Now...who wants to be a fly guy/gal?


----------



## chausman (Jun 25, 2011)

$188K doesn't do much for harnesses if they aren't attached to anything...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MrsFooter (Jun 25, 2011)

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the $157,682.48 in lighting perishables.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Jun 25, 2011)

MrsFooter said:


> I'm still trying to wrap my head around the $157,682.48 in lighting perishables.


Or how about the 300K in LX prep?


----------



## Footer (Jun 25, 2011)

What Rigger? said:


> I think they got off pretty reasonably for the flying elements! Now...who wants to be a fly guy/gal?


 
I'm more concerned with the 1/4 million they spent on the flying programmer.... money well spent...


----------



## bdkdesigns (Jun 25, 2011)

Admittedly I don't know much about the world of costuming. However, what has me scratching my head is their pay. I know all about the royalties making up for some of the gap, but what accounts for that large of a gap? The costume designer is only getting $14,375 while the associate gets $206,285.65?


----------



## Esoteric (Jun 25, 2011)

In costuming the associate is the first hand who is responsible for actually, sizing, fitting, and actually sewing things. I am sure theirs (I almost typed hers, what kind of misogynist am I?) was hourly.

That isn't a lot for lighting perishables really. I thought it might be higher.

Mike


----------



## metti (Jun 25, 2011)

bdkdesigns said:


> Admittedly I don't know much about the world of costuming. However, what has me scratching my head is their pay. I know all about the royalties making up for some of the gap, but what accounts for that large of a gap? The costume designer is only getting $14,375 while the associate gets $206,285.65?


 
My guess would be that the actual designer came up with the concepts and then moved on to their next project while their associate was making a hourly, daily or weekly rate while the rehearsals and previews draged on interminably.


----------



## cdub260 (Jun 26, 2011)

With production costs approaching $50,000,000, how many performances would they have to sell out to break even?


----------



## bdkdesigns (Jun 26, 2011)

That makes sense especially considering how long it took to open. It still surprises me how little the costume designer got comparatively.


----------



## SteveB (Jun 26, 2011)

cdub260 said:


> With production costs approaching $50,000,000, how many performances would they have to sell out to break even?


 
Recalling from memory that they (the investors/producers) hoped to recoup expenses in about 7 years. It was noted that not many musicals run 7 years, so it's going to be interesting to see if the show ever makes back expenses from ticket sales on Broadway. Possibly a tour(s) and/or West End versions will help, but I can't but wonder how they will ever get to the point of taking this show on tour.


----------



## shiben (Jun 26, 2011)

SteveB said:


> Recalling from memory that they (the investors/producers) hoped to recoup expenses in about 7 years. It was noted that not many musicals run 7 years, so it's going to be interesting to see if the show ever makes back expenses from ticket sales on Broadway. Possibly a tour(s) and/or West End versions will help, but I can't but wonder how they will ever get to the point of taking this show on tour.


 
Very large arenas.


----------



## zmb (Jun 26, 2011)

MrsFooter said:


> I'm still trying to wrap my head around the $157,682.48 in lighting perishables.


Where I am, that could get you around 24,258 20x24 sheets of Roscolux gel, 13,419 Rosco steel gobos, or 10,726 HPL lamps. That's a lot of stuff.


----------



## Esoteric (Jun 26, 2011)

zmb said:


> Where I am, that could get you around 24,258 20x24 sheets of Roscolux gel, 13,419 Rosco steel gobos, or 10,726 HPL lamps. That's a lot of stuff.


 
Consider that they are replacing probably a hundred or more cuts of gel every night, they are probably replacing hundreds lamps after 50-100 hours (the time at which the color temps of lamps begin to shift) or so (and keep in mind some of those units have lamps a lot more expensive than $15) over the course of more than a year's worth of rehearsals, it doesn't really strike me as that much.


----------



## shiben (Jun 27, 2011)

Esoteric said:


> Consider that they are replacing probably a hundred or more cuts of gel every night, they are probably replacing hundreds lamps after 50-100 hours (the time at which the color temps of lamps begin to shift) or so (and keep in mind some of those units have lamps a lot more expensive than $15) over the course of more than a year's worth of rehearsals, it doesn't really strike me as that much.


 
I agree. For a giant show like that? I would guess well more than 100 cuts of gel get replaced every night...


----------



## Esoteric (Jun 27, 2011)

shiben said:


> I agree. For a giant show like that? I would guess well more than 100 cuts of gel get replaced every night...


 
Yeah, and that would be close to 30,000 cuts of gel in the course of year of rehearsals.

Mike


----------



## Footer (Jun 27, 2011)

Esoteric said:


> Yeah, and that would be close to 30,000 cuts of gel in the course of year of rehearsals.
> 
> Mike


 
For long install shows, they are not going to swap out gel nightly. First, if you are having burn outs that often you have larger issues. If that was an issue, they would just go dichroic and be done with it. It would cost them so much in labor to change out the gel the cost of gel would be a drop in the bucket. Same thing goes for lamps. They are not swapping out lamps weekly. Monthly is possible, but not weekly. 

Also, all of these expenses were *to date* expenses as of January 2nd, 2011. These were not expected expenditures for the coming year, its money they have already spent. So, yes, they did spend 100k in lighting consumables since they walked into the theatre. I also have a feeling the costume designer was paid so little because he/she had not completed the contract yet.


----------



## rochem (Jun 27, 2011)

Footer said:


> For long install shows, they are not going to swap out gel nightly. First, if you are having burn outs that often you have larger issues. If that was an issue, they would just go dichroic and be done with it. It would cost them so much in labor to change out the gel the cost of gel would be a drop in the bucket. Same thing goes for lamps. They are not swapping out lamps weekly. Monthly is possible, but not weekly.


 
As I read it, Esoteric and shiben were referring to gel changes by the designer as worknotes, not due to burnouts. However, if they were referring to burnouts, I agree with you. Accessing some of the positions they've created in that house is an enormous undertaking in itself, and there's no way the PE would continue to swap in new cuts of gel if they were burning out that frequently.

Also, while Spiderman is a huge show, it's actually not as enormous as you might think from a lighting standpoint. While it's certainly one of the most complex shows on Broadway (units in every nook and cranny, lots of unusual cable runs, lots of flying and moving positions), the physical quantity of units is pretty comparable to other major shows, and in terms of conventional units, there are far less on Spiderman than on shows like Lion King.


----------



## Esoteric (Jun 28, 2011)

I wasn't referring to work notes.

But I have to admit, all my experience is in tours where we did change gel at just about every stop (especially saturate colors), and changed lamps out at the 100-150 hour mark. I assumed Broadway house shows would do the same thing.

Mike


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Jul 1, 2011)

asked a friend of mine close to the matter and this was the response I got:

> Other then the fact that we were working in that theatre for one solid year and did two completely separate shows, both called SPIDERMAN, I have no idea what objects were put into what budget line item. But I can assure you it was not all gel, gobos, tie line and tape.


----------



## Esoteric (Jul 1, 2011)

Pie4Weebl said:


> asked a friend of mine close to the matter and this was the response I got:


 
Pyro? Or are MAC2Ks considered expendables these days?


----------



## chausman (Jul 1, 2011)

Esoteric said:


> ... are MAC2Ks considered expendables these days?


 
Depends on how many times an actor falls on top of one from 30'.


----------



## Esoteric (Jul 1, 2011)

chausman said:


> Depends on how many times an actor falls on top of one from 30'.


 
Wow. Too soon?


----------

