Shakespeare's Globe warns it faces 'extinction'

I guess the same assumption could be said about all manner of big cultural institutions...but so far no promise of help from the government.

This comes from 'evidence' the Globe gave to the DCMS select committee. I suspect we are going to be hearing and reading a lot of this over the coming weeks and months. Some will be genuine, some not.

If I got a sniff of 'free' money, I'd probably lay it on thick myself. No point being surrounded by actors all day and not learning anything from them!

I think the general point is that, as theatres are likely to be some of the last places to reopen (along with pubs), they would need the financial assistance (furloughing etc) to continue longer than some other workplaces. Same point has already been made by multiple theatres.

Because they contribute to the economy quite significantly. 

Jon But surely something like the retail sector does too and that's been allowed to have lots of high profile shops go under. Maybe I'm just being cynical but, given all the cuts to essential services over the past decade, I can't see free market conservatives giving money to a sector that already is already propped up with money from the Arts Council or sponsorship.

If the National is months away from being in trouble, I doubt there’s going to be many who aren’t similarly concerned.

More likely that current theatres that are already state funded would get support first, though.

To the near terror of half my family who have virtually no IT skills.

When the project started the Wanamaker team were brilliant at fund raising. They had imaginative ideas and small and larger events. They got some Royal interest - Philip presented the ‘curtains’ and they got wood from the royal estates etc. Royal interest is often reviled but nothing like it to bring in the big money. The naming of the paving, the wall with donors up in the top foyer, everything very well done. Schools very much involved too. This kind of thing brings in smaller money. And they made it feel special if you had donated. I remember that the public imagination needed to be fired up by actually building one section of the theatre, rather than going round in layers, so you could see the pattern of the finished product, very clever planning.
If they can find some of this original energy they might do ok. You can’t now just say the government should dole out. Too many hands being held out and let’s face it, health and care charities will always be at the top of your giving list. Rightly so. I would urge the Globe people to begin a very public, nation wide and world wide digital campaign. Use all the resources, all the actors who have performed there, all their archive and rethink how they can involve with small donations to sponsor something and then go for the big guys who wouldn’t mind a wing with their name on it or a season named after them. Ruthless, clever fund raising will enable survival not whinging to the lefty lib media for hand outs.

😂 indeed I have. I hope they do get the dosh. 

Always liked the idea of the Globe, they do great productions, enjoyed the tour and the exhibition. What I didn't enjoy was seeing an actual performance there, just not for me. Whoever moaned about uncomfortable seating in a West End theatre never experienced the Globe, also took me quite some time to get 'into' the performance without mics and a side view. Will cherish the experience, but do not need to repeat it in a hurry.

Still I think the Globe is an important venue for London, London theatre, tourism and all kinds of things and should definitely be saved. I think they have unique opportunities to raise money, as the building alone is such a landmark, just have to mount a great campaign around it. There are a few theatres I think should survive, but you can't donate to everything. So I will wait, to see what they come up with, insterad of moaning about it.

Having seen all the press coverage, and the subsequent melt-down on my Twitter Feed (I know a fair number of Shax scholars - several of whom are doing, or have done, the MA in Shakespeare Studies, which is co-located at The Globe), I went and had a poke around the Charity Commission website, which is publicly accessible, so I'm not stating here anything confidential. 

There is of course always something of a lag on these things, so the information I was reading was only Up To Date at October 2018, but it was a revealing read: They are indeed on shaky ground - expenditure almost matches income, and by their own reporting, whilst they aimed to have 3 to 6 months of reserves to meet running costs, they only had/have 1.5 months worth, but felt that, if something drastic happened, that they could reallocate some of the reserves they were holding onto for various capital projects (which appeared to include a significant amount for maintenance of the buildings), and use those 'released monies' to fund another 1.5 month's worth of running costs. 

Now all of this of course comes with the caveat that you can make accounts say almost anything you want, but Michelle Terry has been quoted in various media as saying that they run 'hand to mouth', which appears to be borne out by the reported figures. 

If you want to read the accounts, here is the link: apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends16/0000266916_AC_20181031_E_C.pdf

(hopefully that works)

I've been on a Zoom Call today that discussed the fact that if the theatres were re-opened tomorrow, that it would actually take a few weeks to be able to re-open to audiences, and that, for Commercial Theatres, the costs of mounting any show - even bringing back something that was running, would probably be at least 50% of the Capitalisation. If you consider that for a WE Musical, we are talking £Millions, and also think that The Globe does runs in rep of several shows, that £5million they're talking about needing rapidly starts to look quite conservative. 

And I haven't even thrown in the difficulties of Social Distancing in a theatre - which no-one, as yet, seems to have an answer to that would be palatable to a UK audience, or the Commercial Producers (temperature testing and/or use of masks is one thing - sitting apart from each other makes the entire business model nonviable pretty much instantly). 

Oh - and as a final kicker, whilst Emma Rice might have been a controversial appointment, she does appear to have brought in the cash - as evidenced by the 'this year/last year' financial figures and narrative in the Accounts...