A frog

Maybe they should look into performing at Sadlers Well for the more modern triple bills then. Tamara Rojo seems to want to push the programmation in that direction, and it unfortunately looks unlikely these programmes would fill the Coliseum any day soon, I'm not even sure Ecstasy and Death would have filled SW. I can also see a few advantages to performing at SW, first of all, the programmes would be included in the brochures, that would certainly be an improvement on the current situation. Compared to RB or companies performing at SW, I have to actively seek out when ENB is performing, I can't be the only person for whom this has translated as poor attendance. I don't know how the ticket prices are set, but as they tend to be more or less the same in any given venue regardless of the company, I assume this would also solve one of the common complaints as they would end up being slightly cheaper, I have no doubt this would translate as a shortfall in revenue for ENB, but I assume renting out SW is cheaper than the Coliseum, and given how empty and discounted E&D was, it cannot be much worse than the current situation. And most importantly, part of the SW audience is rather prejudiced against ballet (I know a few, they will for instance happily attend a Random Dance performance but have never seen one of McGregor's piece at the ROH), but they might be interested in where Tamara Rojo is taking the company. Kylian or Ek (with whom I believe she would like to keep working) are probably more of a draw to the NDT/Rambert audience than the families coming to see the Tchaikovsky ballets. The Coliseum is more central, but I'm sure it drives a few people away too.

The ROH indeed sells out almost all the story evening-length ballets, the only exception I remember was a run of Manon where the £40-ish range in the amphi was a bit sparse. I remember the triple bill Ballo della Regina/Live Fire Exercise/DGV being very sparsely populated in the amphi for some of the performances; and if I remember correctly, it was a programme with a 40-ish top price ticket; the problem is not just the price, it is always harder to sell new or rarely performed works. The ROH might also be better able to hide poor sales with their student stand-by programme, I imagine they have a rather large database, and it allows them to fill the house with discounted tickets with virtually no-one knowing about it. To divert a little from the original topic, a lot of the problem comes from the perception of ballet and that plenty of people just won't go. The ROH has every year a performance at heavily discounted prices that can only be attended through a competition in the Sun. I had applied a few years ago (the offer then was to go see Carmen or Mayerling); I had very little hope entering the competition, I ended being able to buy up to 28 tickets, and very close to the deadline, the hall still looked half to two thirds empty, I then found out from a friend who was in the student stand-by programme that it was how they ended filling up the house. Out of three million Sun readers, they maybe found 2,000 at most who were willing to try to go to the opera or ballet, even with cheap tickets (stalls/grand tier were 20 for ballet and 30 for opera, most of the amphi for less than 10) and the assurance there wouldn't be "poshos" in the house. To go back on topic, anything ENB is trying to do to broaden its audience and get new people interested should be encouraged. And maybe they could indeed try to have a few performances somewhere else? I don't know how practical a Sadler's Well season or two a year would be, but there would at least be a decent promotional push for those. Would I be corrected in assuming that the BRB performances at SW are better attended than those at the Coliseum?

I don't really know anything about the economic realities of putting on a programme, but I assume everyone expects that a triple bill like Ecstasy and Death will not be as well attended as another run of Swan Lake or Sleeping Beauty; does anyone have any idea what an acceptable attendance would be from the management's point of view? After all, even the RB every so often has to discount their triple bills and regularly doesn't sell them out.

Without being as enthusiastic, I agree with all of Meunier's points at the beginning of the post, you do get all of this. But overall, I found it a rather uninvolving evening, it wasn't actually bad, but there was little I found engaging. It was very pretty but overall I thought it lacked personality. I agree though that the third act was slightly better than the rest; but it is rather telling that just a day later, there is little that stayed with me. I feel a bit bad writing that as we see little of Ratmansky here, I very much liked Seven Sonatas with ABT but nothing else I've seen so far makes me agree with the superlatives he receives, even if I have no doubt that they are deserved (I liked 24 Preludes well enough, but found it rather light, and not necessarily in a good way). I have however nothing but praise for the company, the corps was perfectly in sync and the roles were, I assume, danced perfectly. After the Osipova/Vasiliev performances of the Mikhailovsky, it was very nice to see ballet performances where the dancers served the steps and the story (I'm only contrasting the two without meaning to judge, both experiences can be rewarding, and in these cases, I very much preferred the evenings watching Don Q and Laurencia).

TKTS has £67.00 tickets for £20.00 for the rest of the run, it's already possible to get them for all performances, they may also have some for R&J at Sadler's Well.

I'd have Bychkov's Tristan over pretty much anything, but on the other hand Nina Stemme… Do you really have to choose?

I seems very likely that tickets will be available on the day through the TKTS booth in Leicester Square, they currently announce tbc on their website, but given how many seats are still unsold it will most likely be the case; they only announced it on the day for the Mikhailovsky run, but all but one performances ended being available there for £20.00 each.

My understanding is that the subsidy from the government is there to make sure as many as possible enjoy ballet or other art forms, it doesn't (and in my opinion shouldn't) have anything to do with the nationality of the dancers. And the Royal Ballet is doing its part, partnership with the Sun, cinema relays, and I am sure plenty more I am not aware of. Another misconception attached is that the subsidies benefit people who could afford it anyway, once again, they are here to make sure anyone can afford seats, if one wants to know how things would be without public money, they only have to take a look at the Hochhauser seating plan and price charts at Covent Garden, although there has been an improvement in the past couple of years. But if you remember or can dig up one from four years ago or older you will see that cheap tickets are non-existent, I very much enjoyed the Maarinsky when I saw them in 2009 (I think), but I remember being rather annoyed at having to pay £50 to sit on row S of the amphi. I definitely wouldn't attend as often (and I guess I am not alone), nor would I spend as much time as I do trying to bring in newcomers, if these were the regular prices the RB charged. The RB is very much an international company, one of the best in the world (and probably the best where dancers don't all come from the same school and background), and as such should be supported by the government. It is great for the image of the country and there has to be some tourism involved with all the economic benefits attached. I am certainly not going to complain that it attracts some of the best dancers from all over the world, this autumn's Don Quixote casting would look pretty sad if we only had UK (or from the EU to remain within the law) dancers. I also think that if there were British dancers who were just as good, we would know about them, and the RB would welcome them with open arms (one just has to look at the publicity push behind Claire Calvert, although it seems to have died down a little). And without getting too political, trying to judge what should be financed based on what people want is a slippery slope. I am also pretty sure that the tax bill of about half of the ballet and opera going public more than covers the Art Council budget and any Art subsidied (and then a lot more), I'm guessing they are fine with their money being used like this. Sorry for the rambling post, but that companies should care what nationalities their dancers are, that the subsidy is questionable, and that these two questions should be linked are things I strongly disagree with (enough to push me to register, I'll try to stay around to give reviews and impressions and generally participate).