Jump to content
Darlex

'Evidence-based' marketing at the ROH - that would explain a lot!

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Geoff said:

it was about Asian lesbians making curry in Glasgow, and so the perfect PC trivector. It was a critical and commercial flop, but no matter; we ticked the boxes.

 

 

I assume ROH's dynamic pricing capability will now allow me to self-identify as a young Asian lesbian at the time of booking and get a 70% discount.  My lawyer dares anyone to say I'm not one.

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quintus, you might be safer being a transgender lesbian so as to straddle all possibilities as well as gaining access to the trans loos which surely must be installed at ROH fairly soon as they burnish their right-on credentials.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're getting a little heavy on the irony here, folks.  We Mods have just had a difficult few days elsewhere on the Forum and could do without complaints here.  Just a word to the wise, eh - your point has been adequately made.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, just catching up, but has anybody seen anything from ROH that seems to resolve all this or shut it down?

 

From what I can see nobody from ROH seems to have said that the statements made by their Director of Media and Audiences (in the artsprofessional piece) are wrong. The piece itself remains up which presumably means ROH agree with it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Bruce said:

Sorry, just catching up, but has anybody seen anything from ROH that seems to resolve all this or shut it down?

 

From what I can see nobody from ROH seems to have said that the statements made by their Director of Media and Audiences (in the artsprofessional piece) are wrong. The piece itself remains up which presumably means ROH agree with it.

 

 

Here is one, Bruce.

 

"

Thank you for your email. I have advised Lucy of your comments and she has asked me to respond on her behalf.
 
Please be assured that we have no intention of deliberately reducing the number of Friends attending performances at the Royal Opera House and did not mean that. 
 
The piece written by Arts Professional intended to describe more generally the Royal Opera House's intention to broaden its audience in the long-term, and we deeply apologise if the wrong impression was given in the article to Friends about our pricing policy.
 
Best regards,
 
Graham Boland
Visitor Experience"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, SPD444 said:

 

 

 

 
Please be assured that we have no intention of deliberately reducing the number of Friends attending performances at the Royal Opera House and did not mean that. 
 

 

This reply still doesn’t address the issue.  The article wasn’t about reducing the number of regulars attending performances.  It was about reducing the number of performances attended by each individual regular.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SPD444 said:

I have advised Lucy of your comments and she has asked me to respond on her behalf.

 
Please be assured that we have no intention of deliberately reducing the number of Friends attending performances at the Royal Opera House and did not mean that. ...
 
Graham Boland
Visitor Experience"

 

 

50 minutes ago, Bluebird said:

 

This reply still doesn’t address the issue.  The article wasn’t about reducing the number of regulars attending performances.  It was about reducing the number of performances attended by each individual regular.

 

...a point which it would be very well worth SPD444 making in their reply to Lucy aka Graham Boland (just in case SPD444 has not already done so). The ROH should not be able to get away with using weasel language without being held to account. 

 

Edited by Geoff
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bluebird said:

 

This reply still doesn’t address the issue.  The article wasn’t about reducing the number of regulars attending performances.  It was about reducing the number of performances attended by each individual regular.

 

My question was why the ROH want me to cut back on the number of times I attend in favour of all these young people who cannot get a ticket. The fact that the answer addressed a different question was not a surprise. Like politicians they answer the question they want to be asked not the question asked.

Edited by SPD444
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, SPD444 said:

 

My question was why the ROH want me to cut back on the number of times I attend in favour of all these young people who cannot get a ticket. The fact that the answer addressed a different question was not a surprise. Like politicians they answer the question they want to be asked not the question asked.

 

Indeed. And my suggestion was that it is surely worth pointing this out to them, so that they stop thinking we are both dumb and docile. Any note one sends at this point (ie one has complained, reasonably and politely; they have replied dishonestly or otherwise inadequately) should ideally be copied to Alex Beard, so that management can't subsequently say, as so often happens, that they were never appraised of what underlings were doing.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a brief paragraph summarising the debacle on p 33 of the new Private Eye......

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Mary said:

There is a brief paragraph summarising the debacle on p 33 of the new Private Eye......

 

 

I read said item a couple of hours ago and thought it was bang on.  Do they have a mole on this site? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Two Pigeons said:

 

 

I read said item a couple of hours ago and thought it was bang on.  Do they have a mole on this site? 

 

Let's hope...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Two Pigeons said:

 

 

I read said item a couple of hours ago and thought it was bang on.  Do they have a mole on this site? 

 

I think Lunchtime O'Boulez has simply looked at the comments on the Arts Professional website ... but does it provide an enticing opportunity to write to Private Eye to add a little more colour?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, JohnS said:

...... but does it provide an enticing opportunity to write to Private Eye to add a little more colour?

 

Go for it JohnS 😀 !

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I certainly won’t be cancelling my subscription!!  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sim said:

Well I certainly won’t be cancelling my subscription!!  

 

 

Me neither!   Coming up for 35 years and counting to page 94.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×