Gardiner, C.E. (1988). The West End theatre audience 1981-1986. (Unpublished Doctoral thesis, City University London) City Research Online Original citation: Gardiner, C.E. (1988). The West End theatre audience 1981-1986. (Unpublished Doctoral thesis, City University London) Permanent City Research Online URL: http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/8346/ Copyright & reuse City University London has developed City Research Online so that its users may access the research outputs of City University London's staff. Copyright © and Moral Rights for this paper are retained by the individual author(s) and/ or other copyright holders. All material in City Research Online is checked for eligibility for copyright before being made available in the live archive. URLs from City Research Online may be freely distributed and linked to from other web pages. Versions of research The version in City Research Online may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check the Permanent City Research Online URL above for the status of the paper. Enquiries If you have any enquiries about any aspect of City Research Online, or if you wish to make contact with the author(s) of this paper, please email the team at [email protected]. CHAPTER 6 BOOKING AND PAYING FOR WEST END THEATRE TICKETS (1) Booking methods The following table shows the distribution of booking methods used for the performance surveyed. The estimated number of sales (1) in each survey period that were accounted for by each of these booking methods follows in brackets. 1981/82 1985/86 Weighted base 11650 6497 % sales % sales Booking method (millions) (millions) Theatre box-office in person 34 (3.0) 41 (4.3) Theatre box-office by phone 22 (1.9) 25 (2.7) Theatre box-office by post 9 (0.8) 5 (0.5) Ticket agency (inc. hotel) 17 (1.5) 16 (1.7) Leicester Square booth 4 (0.3) 4 (0.4) Inclusive package 3 (0.3) 4 (0.4) Someone else booked 2 (0.2) 2 (0.2) Other (including complimentary) 9 (0.8) 3 (0.3) Fig 6-1 Distribution of the West End audience 12K booking methods used for the performance surveyed Base = all respondents Booking in person at the theatre box-office was the method most commonly used in both survey periods. Its importance 314 increased in 1985/86, both as a percentage of total sales and in actual sales made by this method, the latter increasing by around 1.3 million, or 437., in 1985/86. This increase was probably connected with the increased percentage of the audience who were already in London on the day of performance in 1985/86, and who could therefore conveniently visit the theatre box-office in person. Telephone booking to the box-office was the second most commonly used booking method in both survey periods. Sales made by this method increased by almost exactly the same percentage as personal booking at the box-office in 1985/86, by 427., an increase of around 0.8 million in the actual number of sales made by this method. Agency bookings came third in importance in both survey periods, accounting for roughly the same percentage of sales in both survey periods. There was, however, a much smaller increase in 1985/86 in actual sales made by this method than by either personal or phone booking to the box- office, of around 0.2 million, or 137.. In 1981/82, respondents who booked at agencies were asked to make a distinction between bookings m'de at an agency overseas, a hotel desk/porter, or at another form of specialist ticket agency in the U.K.. The majority of agency sales proved to have been made at a specialist agency in the U.K. These accounted for 767. of agency sales, 315 hotel desks for 187., and agencies overseas for 67.. In 1985/86, a more detailed breakdown was requested from respondents who had booked at agencies; they were asked to specify whether the agency they used was overseas or in the U.K., and if in the U.K. to give the name of the agency, and to state whether the tickets had been obtained in person, by phone, or by post to the agency. 67. of agency sales had been made at overseas agencies, the same percentage of the total as in 1981/82. Hotel desks accounted for a further 127. of agency sales, a fall of around 60,000 sales made in this way compared with 1981/82. The remaining 827. of total agency sales in 1985/86 was made up of 67. at travel agents, 127. at department stores and 647. at other specialised agencies. 807. of bookings at U.K. agencies were made by personal visit, and 20% by telephone, and there were no reported postal bookings to U.K. agencies. 407. of users of U.K. agencies could not remember the name of the agency they had used, and in general, only those agencies that were the largest and best known were mentioned by name. The most often mentioned of the U.K. specialist agencies were; Keith Prowse and Edwards and Edwards for personal bookings, Keith Prowse and First Call for telephone bookings, and Harrods for department store agencies. A full list of U.K. agencies named by respondents in 1985/86, including department stores and travel agents, is given in Appendix 9. Booking by post to the theatre box—office was the fourth most commonly used method in both survey periods, and the 316 least often used of the methods of booking at the theatre box-office. It was the only one of the major booking methods used to decline in importance in 1985/86, when sales made by this method decreased by around 0.3 million, or 38%. The half-price ticket booth in Leicester Square (2) was the fifth most commonly used method of booking in both survey periods, and accounted for around 47. of sales in both survey periods. The surveys produced figures of around 335,000 sales in 1981/82 and 395,000 in 1985/86 made at Leicester Square booth. Actual booth sales recorded by SWET totalled approximately 322,000 for the calendar year 1982, and for the closest 52 week period to the 1985/86 survey period, around 381,000. (3) This is a confirmation of the accuracy of the survey findings. Sales at the booth increased by around 187. in 1985/86, a fairly modest rise in comparison with the rise in bookings direct to the theatre box-office. The way in which booth sales were spread over the individual productions surveyed showed some variation between the two survey period. In 1981/82, the majority of productions surveyed had sent tickets to the booth, and the percentage of sales for the performance surveyed which were accounted for by the booth was typically in the 27. - 87. range for most individual productions. In 1965/86, however, the situation was much more polarised, with a number of the productions surveyed sending no tickets to the booth, while others did a large percentage of their business for the performance surveyed through the booth, up 317 to 257. of sales in some cases. Aggregated over the West End as a whole, however, the global picture for booth sales was very similar in both survey periods. The 1981/82 surveys included additional questions about the booth. Respondents were asked whether they were aware of the existence of the booth, and whether they had used it in the past to buy tickets for West End performances. 557. had heard of the booth, and of them, 247. had used it in the past. This is equivalent to 137. of the total West End audience having heard of and used the booth in the past, compared with an average 47. using it to book for the performance surveyed. Since the majority of productions surveyed in 1981/82 had tickets available at the booth for the performance surveyed, this indicates that booth users did not book at the booth for all their West End theatre visits. Inclusive package bookings, made as part of a holiday, travel, accommodation or restaurant package, were the sixth most commonly used method of booking in 1981/82, and tied for fifth place with bookings at Leicester Square booth in 1985/86. The number of package bookings increased by around 0.1 million in 1985/86. Those booking by this method were much more likely than those booking by other methods to be part of a large group of 12 or more. 387. of package bookers in 1981/82 and 217. in 1985/86 were part of a large group. They were also more likely than those booking by other methods to be full-time students. 297. of 318 package bookers in 1981/82 and 457. in 1985/86 were full- time students. Excluding those who had had arrangements made for them as part of a packaged booking, 27. of the overall audience in both survey periods said that someone else had booked their tickets, and this type of booking accounted for around 200,000 sales in both survey periods. In many of these cases, the person booking would have been a group organiser. No special category was allocated in the question on booking methods for group bookings as such, since a group booking could have been made by any of the methods already mentioned (except at the half-price booth, at which a maximum of four tickets per applicant can be obtained). Group bookings were classified according to the actual means by which the group organiser had obtained the tickets.