625 posts
|
Post by chernjam on Feb 8, 2024 4:04:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by happysooz2 on Feb 8, 2024 19:48:45 GMT
What would the UK equivalent salary be?
|
|
3,486 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Feb 8, 2024 20:01:31 GMT
What would the UK equivalent salary be? From April, west end rates p/w between £720 - £880 depending on theatre size. |
|
|
|
Post by A.Ham on Feb 9, 2024 8:16:44 GMT
What would the UK equivalent salary be? From April, west end rates p/w between £720 - £880 depending on theatre size. Vs. just over £2k a week on Broadway. That’s a massive difference! Shows why tickets there are so much more expensive, and how our amazing and talented West End casts are woefully underpaid. |
|
1,484 posts
|
Post by theatrefan62 on Feb 9, 2024 8:23:55 GMT
I don't know about underpaid.
I wouldnt mind earning £800 a week to be honest.
|
|
3,486 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Feb 9, 2024 8:48:33 GMT
I think Broadway pays better, though only a slightly higher marginal average to pay when compared across different industries. US pays better generally, taxes are lower, and there's higher productivity and pride in working and paying one's way. UK pay is poorer, taxes are much higher, productivity is lower, and society is addicted to benefits and subsidies.
I know where I'd rather live.
|
|
|
|
Post by A.Ham on Feb 9, 2024 9:22:11 GMT
What would the UK equivalent salary be? From April, west end rates p/w between £720 - £880 depending on theatre size. Not wanting to derail the SB thread (mods, feel free to move my posts elsewhere), but is the £720-£880 pw for each member of the entire cast? Presumably it varies from swing/ensemble up to leading role? Are our West End Valjeans, Elphabas and Phantoms paid more? I appreciate it would vary if we're talking star casting in a play or musical, but would be interested to know for the others... |
|
|
|
Post by punxsutawney on Feb 9, 2024 9:25:39 GMT
I don't know about underpaid. I wouldnt mind earning £800 a week to be honest. Presuming you work every week in a year, that's £41,600. Tidy salary but it doesn't go as far as it should in London. But most actors won't work every week in a year, they'll have gaps between productions where they aren't booked. It quite quickly becomes more and more of a squeeze, for what is a very demanding job both physically and mentally! |
|
1,484 posts
|
Post by theatrefan62 on Feb 9, 2024 9:55:54 GMT
I don't know about underpaid. I wouldnt mind earning £800 a week to be honest. Presuming you work every week in a year, that's £41,600. Tidy salary but it doesn't go as far as it should in London. But most actors won't work every week in a year, they'll have gaps between productions where they aren't booked. It quite quickly becomes more and more of a squeeze, for what is a very demanding job both physically and mentally! Like many other jobs then. Also when they are in a show and it's up and running they don't do nearly the hours most jobs entail. I'm not saying actors have it perfect, or they don't work hard. But I do have an issue how many of them often act like they have it harder than anyone else. Then there's the superiority complex some of them have over other jobs (e.g. how insulted they were at being told they were in service industry). |
|
3,486 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Feb 9, 2024 10:28:11 GMT
From April, west end rates p/w between £720 - £880 depending on theatre size. Not wanting to derail the SB thread (mods, feel free to move my posts elsewhere), but is the £720-£880 pw for each member of the entire cast? Presumably it varies from swing/ensemble up to leading role? Are our West End Valjeans, Elphabas and Phantoms paid more? I appreciate it would vary if we're talking star casting in a play or musical, but would be interested to know for the others... Yes, these are minimum rates. Swings earn more, leads earn lots more (usually). All depends on who you are and how good your agent is... |
|
153 posts
|
Post by Alejo on Feb 9, 2024 10:56:35 GMT
From April, west end rates p/w between £720 - £880 depending on theatre size. Vs. just over £2k a week on Broadway. That’s a massive difference! Shows why tickets there are so much more expensive, and how our amazing and talented West End casts are woefully underpaid. The $2,638 - $3,000 per week is for the standby Norma Desmond. At least that’s the only role listed in that Playbill article. So I’m not sure we’re comparing like for like here. They’ll be wanting an established Broadway name for the standby, I’d imagine. And it’s Norma Desmond. That said, that’s for a standby with only one scheduled performance a week. |
|
|
|
Post by theatreloverlondon on Feb 9, 2024 18:46:37 GMT
Vs. just over £2k a week on Broadway. That’s a massive difference! Shows why tickets there are so much more expensive, and how our amazing and talented West End casts are woefully underpaid. The $2,638 - $3,000 per week is for the standby Norma Desmond. At least that’s the only role listed in that Playbill article. So I’m not sure we’re comparing like for like here. They’ll be wanting an established Broadway name for the standby, I’d imagine. And it’s Norma Desmond. That said, that’s for a standby with only one scheduled performance a week. But standby and alternate are not the same. The standby in our version wasn’t a name |
|
153 posts
|
Post by Alejo on Feb 9, 2024 19:44:54 GMT
The $2,638 - $3,000 per week is for the standby Norma Desmond. At least that’s the only role listed in that Playbill article. So I’m not sure we’re comparing like for like here. They’ll be wanting an established Broadway name for the standby, I’d imagine. And it’s Norma Desmond. That said, that’s for a standby with only one scheduled performance a week. But standby and alternate are not the same. The standby in our version wasn’t a name Good point. I've mistaken the job advert for "Norma Desmond Standby" as the Rachel Tucker of the Broadway version. |
|
|
|
Post by sph on Feb 10, 2024 0:33:54 GMT
Also, remember that if an actor is on stage in a lead role in a West End or Broadway production, they are effectively an Olympic-athlete equivalent in the world of theatre. They might get paid a lot more than the average office job etc, but it isn't an average job to be fair.
You are effectively seeing someone who is (or should be) a leading world expert at what they do.
(You may now comment below about how you disagree and there are new graduates who aren't and how you didn't like how someone sang the eleven o'clock number in the show you saw last year)
|
|
3,349 posts
|
Post by Dr Tom on Feb 10, 2024 0:53:06 GMT
Financially as a reputable London actor, you can get paid well, but for a relatively short period of time. Your job is to build up a long-term career, and also to save money during the time that you're being paid well to offset everything else.
I have huge respect for actors, but I could also translate their struggles to my own life and career very easily.
As a fresh graduate, the salary is good. 20 years on as an ensemble member, with a mortgage and a family to support, maybe less so.
Comparing London salaries with New York salaries is a false economy. I love New York and I'd live there for a year or two, but everything is hideously expensive. For all the complaints, London is a bargain in comparison.
Choosing to act for a living is not the easiest life. But the people who do must know they are already at the top of their class. A lot of graduates will never even get that opportunity. Everyone should be thankful - and also have a backup plan.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Feb 10, 2024 7:42:58 GMT
Yes, I don’t think you can overstate how much more expensive it is to live in New York. My best friend moved there last year with his partners job, and he says that it is ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
Post by theatreloverlondon on Feb 10, 2024 16:25:08 GMT
Yes, I don’t think you can overstate how much more expensive it is to live in New York. My best friend moved there last year with his partners job, and he says that it is ridiculous. Rent alone in New York would set someone back several ‘k’ a month. |
|
|
|
Post by nick on Feb 10, 2024 16:35:11 GMT
I think Broadway pays better, though only a slightly higher marginal average to pay when compared across different industries. US pays better generally, taxes are lower, and there's higher productivity and pride in working and paying one's way. UK pay is poorer, taxes are much higher, productivity is lower, and society is addicted to benefits and subsidies. I know where I'd rather live. I assume you can back that up with statistics? Particularly "pride in working" and "addicted to benefits" that feels a bit insulting. |
|
3,486 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Feb 10, 2024 17:22:29 GMT
I think Broadway pays better, though only a slightly higher marginal average to pay when compared across different industries. US pays better generally, taxes are lower, and there's higher productivity and pride in working and paying one's way. UK pay is poorer, taxes are much higher, productivity is lower, and society is addicted to benefits and subsidies. I know where I'd rather live. I assume you can back that up with statistics? Particularly "pride in working" and "addicted to benefits" that feels a bit insulting. If I must. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Feb 10, 2024 17:42:00 GMT
Yes, I don’t think you can overstate how much more expensive it is to live in New York. My best friend moved there last year with his partners job, and he says that it is ridiculous. Rent alone in New York would set someone back several ‘k’ a month. I think Parsons is helping out with the rent… |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Feb 10, 2024 18:50:00 GMT
I think Broadway pays better, though only a slightly higher marginal average to pay when compared across different industries. US pays better generally, taxes are lower, and there's higher productivity and pride in working and paying one's way. UK pay is poorer, taxes are much higher, productivity is lower, and society is addicted to benefits and subsidies. I know where I'd rather live. I assume you can back that up with statistics? Particularly "pride in working" and "addicted to benefits" that feels a bit insulting. The USA is a much richer country than UK. GDP per capita in USA is $76,000 and in UK is $45,000. In fact GDP per capita in UK is lower than even the poorest USA state which is Mississippi at $47,000 per capita. |
|
|
|
Post by nick on Feb 10, 2024 18:58:47 GMT
I assume you can back that up with statistics? Particularly "pride in working" and "addicted to benefits" that feels a bit insulting. The USA is a much richer country than UK. GDP per capita in USA is £76,000 and in UK is $45,000. In fact GDP per capita in UK is lower than even the poorest USA state which is Mississippi at $47,000 per capita. Oh I think it’s fairly clear that the US is richer than the UK. But I suspect it’s simply opinion that Americans take more pride in their work. Or that Brits are addicted to benefits. My opinion is that businesses in the US are more likely to take advantage of their staff particularly about working hours without pay. And the UK looks after the vulnerable in society more than the US. As I say my opinion. I know where I’d rather live. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Feb 10, 2024 19:31:20 GMT
The USA is a much richer country than UK. GDP per capita in USA is £76,000 and in UK is $45,000. In fact GDP per capita in UK is lower than even the poorest USA state which is Mississippi at $47,000 per capita. Oh I think it’s fairly clear that the US is richer than the UK. But I suspect it’s simply opinion that Americans take more pride in their work. Or that Brits are addicted to benefits. My opinion is that businesses in the US are more likely to take advantage of their staff particularly about working hours without pay. And the UK looks after the vulnerable in society more than the US. As I say my opinion. I know where I’d rather live. I've lived in both, there are advantages and disadvantages to each. I've also lived in a EU country, same. |
|
|
|
Post by jaqs on Feb 11, 2024 17:12:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by nick on Feb 11, 2024 18:15:00 GMT
Oh I think it’s fairly clear that the US is richer than the UK. But I suspect it’s simply opinion that Americans take more pride in their work. Or that Brits are addicted to benefits. My opinion is that businesses in the US are more likely to take advantage of their staff particularly about working hours without pay. And the UK looks after the vulnerable in society more than the US. As I say my opinion. I know where I’d rather live. I've lived in both, there are advantages and disadvantages to each. I've also lived in a EU country, same. Well that’s the sensible answer. |
|
