bridiem

Of course you had no obligation to move to the other seats! As you say, if someone else wanted to move forward into the empty seats that would have been up to them but you chose your seat and were 100% entitled to stay in it. How strange. I hope you still enjoyed the last act!

That is wonderful.

I think you're referring to 27 Feb 1982 (yes I have it on my list!) when Wendy Ellis broke her wrists in The Two Pigeons, which followed La Bayadère with Nureyev and Brind (now that's what I call a bill!). In fact Ellis was replaced by Lesley Collier, who I was in the stage box and realised something serious had happened.

So they keep implying that they'll just be doing what they've always done, in spite of earlier wording that indicated a definite change of policy. Are they backtracking because of the feedback (whilst not acknowledging that this is what they're doing?). Or was the earlier wording misleading?

Yes - this article was in yesterday's Links. Impressive in a way that a ballet story should receive such prominence!

Yes - I don't know about elsewhere, but in 'my' part of the Amphi WT tickets are more expensive than Swan Lake. I really don't understand the thinking behind that.

It still isn't showing at all, including on the calendar. ??

I emailed Alex Beard about this and he said that they absolutely appreciate how important casting information is but that not all casting is known far in advance especially for new works, so they cannot guarantee supplying all casting in advance. I replied that this has always been the case but that the wording of the email to Friends implies a change from the current situation which is what has caused consternation. He has now replied to say that he has taken my comments on board. So, I'm not really any the wiser!

I emailed Alex Beard about this and he has reiterated that they expect the name change to help with public perceptions, advocacy work and their attractiveness to financial partners. So let's hope it does have this effect.

That has indeed become clear, but it assumes a familiarity with the organogram (if such things still exist) of the whole ROH that most people do not possess. If many 'stakeholders' apparently did not even know that the ROH includes the RB, how likely is it that they would know that ROH is the brand name of an umbrella body that runs all the companies and is also the name of the theatre? It should all have been explained clearly, as you have done here. Perhaps they should get you to write their press releases/emails in future, @bangorballetboy!

Judging by the two articles about this in today's Links, there is a deal of confusion about this name change. One writer thinks the name of the building has changed, the other thinks there is now only one company performing at the - er - ROH. Which I think is indicative of how poorly this has been publicised (and possibly, considered).

About dates: it seems to me (though I can't give evidence) that over the years booking dates have got earlier in relation to the performances involved; if this is part of the problem, the solution is not to not give casting information, it's to move the booking dates. (And yes, I know they want as much money in as early as possible; but they're not going to get it by depriving ballet Friends of casting information.)

I'm sorry - that must be so disappointing for you.

It's surely a likelihood, isn't it? Or do you think it might have been designed internally, or for free? (Would be very glad to hear that if so! Except that I think it's horrible, whoever designed it...).

No, it's not; the RB has announced casting well in advance certainly for all the time I've been going to ballet (47 years). So why should it no longer be possible?

Yes. And, it would have been more honest to say clearly that casting details will no longer be available, or may not be available (whichever it is) before priority booking opens, with an associated explanation, rather than slipping in a sentence that looked like a mistake since it would be such a radical change and then waiting for eagle-eyed Friends to query it.

So can I, but these are not the things about which there is alleged to be confusion.

Why re-name the organisation to include 'Ballet' if at the same time they alienate their most loyal ballet supporters??

If they cease to provide casting info in time for Friends' booking dates, there will be no point having priority booking since I only know which performances I want to go to when casting is announced. So from my point of view there would be no point in being a Friend - it's too expensive to keep on for philanthropic reasons. And it would effectively discriminate against ballet lovers since as I understand it opera casting is known from the outset; so they would risk losing many of the their 'ballet Friends'.

Yes, it does beggar belief. I simply don't believe that anyone even remotely involved in or interested in this field would not know that the Royal Ballet performs at the ROH. (Or if they really don't, what on earth has the ROH being doing in terms of its communications with these people?).

The Standard article about this (in today's Links) includes a photo of Oliver Mears and Kevin O'Hare. I don't know when it was taken but I have to say that KOH looks utterly miserable. I hope that's just the 'I'm a serious artist so I can't look happy' image that so many 'creatives' feel they have to project nowadays (though KOH is usually very smiley, in fact), rather than a reflection of his real feelings. Either way it's a strange choice of photo for what is supposed to be a good news article.

Thank you, @Richard LH - I haven't received my magazine or letter yet but that's a relief. In that case I don't see the change as objectionable either, since it makes no difference in practice. However I'm a bit surprised that the ROH found it necessary to spend time and money on this particular change right now, unless they see some financial advantage to it. Perhaps they do.

It was an info@ address - I wasn't sure which one would be most appropriate. But it didn't work...

And, to answer myself, my email bounced back as undeliverable even though it's an address I've used before. The email received this morning had 'roh' in the address so I don't think that can be the problem. I'm confused. I give up. I hope @Elodie receives a reply!

No doubt there's some fiendishly clever designer answer to this.