180 posts
|
Post by saral on Nov 12, 2021 21:10:56 GMT
How many ppl have managed to go to theatres all over the country without needing a negative test since theatres re-opened...if theatres were a concern as an area to spread the virus, tests would be mandatory in all or they would be closed down
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2021 21:15:54 GMT
How many ppl have managed to go to theatres all over the country without needing a negative test since theatres re-opened...if theatres were a concern as an area to spread the virus, tests would be mandatory in all or they would be closed down Except there is no longer an effective way of tracking infections since track and trace is rarely active anymore. You can’t say that theatres are safe spaces with no evidence to base that on. We do know, however, that close contact with others increases our chances of infection. Whether that be in a theatre or not. Surely you wouldn’t invite a person into your own home if you knew they were positive? Please stop trying to justify yourself, it’s a dangerous school of thought to be spreading.
|
|
180 posts
|
Post by saral on Nov 12, 2021 21:37:50 GMT
How many ppl have managed to go to theatres all over the country without needing a negative test since theatres re-opened...if theatres were a concern as an area to spread the virus, tests would be mandatory in all or they would be closed down Except there is no longer an effective way of tracking infections since track and trace is rarely active anymore. You can’t say that theatres are safe spaces with no evidence to base that on. We do know, however, that close contact with others increases our chances of infection. Whether that be in a theatre or not. Surely you wouldn’t invite a person into your own home if you knew they were positive? Please stop trying to justify yourself, it’s a dangerous school of thought to be spreading. Have you been to a theatre since they re-opened?
|
|
310 posts
|
Post by showoff on Nov 12, 2021 21:38:14 GMT
For those complaining put the 'result' in as negative...it's all on trust anyway Do you think you should be advising this? Morally, are you OK with this? So advising someone who is positive to go out and spread it to potentially vulnerable people who could die or get very sick and live with long COVID? You're OK with that?
|
|
|
Post by floorshow on Nov 12, 2021 21:48:15 GMT
Except there is no longer an effective way of tracking infections since track and trace is rarely active anymore. You can’t say that theatres are safe spaces with no evidence to base that on. We do know, however, that close contact with others increases our chances of infection. Whether that be in a theatre or not. Surely you wouldn’t invite a person into your own home if you knew they were positive? Please stop trying to justify yourself, it’s a dangerous school of thought to be spreading. Have you been to a theatre since they re-opened? I have, many times. Wimbledon too. I'm triple jabbed and I am PCRd regularly but that's beside the point, I would never even consider testing positive and then lying about that result just so I could go out for the night. It's a level of stupidity and selfishness that I'm genuinely surprised someone would even suggest.
|
|
180 posts
|
Post by saral on Nov 12, 2021 21:54:00 GMT
Have you been to a theatre since they re-opened? I have, many times. Wimbledon too. I'm triple jabbed and I am PCRd regularly but that's beside the point, I would never even consider testing positive and then lying about that result just so I could go out for the night. It's a level of stupidity and selfishness that I'm genuinely surprised someone would even suggest. I was actually going to ask if you insisted on the ppl next to you testing before taking their seat
|
|
|
Post by ThereWillBeSun on Nov 12, 2021 21:54:39 GMT
If doing one free test stops people from booking, those people didn't really want to go anyway. Not sure about that. Lateral flow tests are not exactly pleasant things. And many people do simply find things like that difficult and there is no free or even cheap way to grt someone to do it for you. It's not exactly pleasant contacting COVID either. .... I've heard childbirth is also painful. Come on now. It's a swab.
|
|
|
Post by ThereWillBeSun on Nov 12, 2021 21:56:01 GMT
For those complaining put the 'result' in as negative...it's all on trust anyway SELFISH. SELFISH. SELFISH. Shame on you. Thanks for potentially putting people at risk. That's not OK. What is wrong with you?
|
|
180 posts
|
Post by saral on Nov 12, 2021 21:56:14 GMT
For those complaining put the 'result' in as negative...it's all on trust anyway Do you think you should be advising this? Morally, are you OK with this? So advising someone who is positive to go out and spread it to potentially vulnerable people who could die or get very sick and live with long COVID? You're OK with that? Hardly advertising, a tiny % of the population read this forum...i first saw it mentioned on a Wimbledon forum, so I'm not the only one thinking about it
|
|
|
Post by ThereWillBeSun on Nov 12, 2021 21:56:59 GMT
And I am officially not reading this thread any more- I cannot believe what I am reading?!??!!?
I'm excited to see Cabaret - never seen the film or the stage show.
Will be interesting.
[just responded to a poster below who I swear is just saying stuff to stir things on TB]
|
|
|
Post by ThereWillBeSun on Nov 12, 2021 21:57:30 GMT
Do you think you should be advising this? Morally, are you OK with this? So advising someone who is positive to go out and spread it to potentially vulnerable people who could die or get very sick and live with long COVID? You're OK with that? Hardly advertising, a tiny % of the population read this forum...i first saw it mentioned on a Wimbledon forum, so I'm not the only one thinking about it Does not mean it's the right thing to do.
|
|
|
Post by floorshow on Nov 12, 2021 22:00:01 GMT
I have, many times. Wimbledon too. I'm triple jabbed and I am PCRd regularly but that's beside the point, I would never even consider testing positive and then lying about that result just so I could go out for the night. It's a level of stupidity and selfishness that I'm genuinely surprised someone would even suggest. I was actually going to ask if you insisted on the ppl next to you testing before taking their seat You are responsible for your behaviour, not the people unfortunate to be sitting next you if you manage to get in knowing you haven't tested or met the T&Cs of entry. Just you, no-one else. One thing has nothing to do with the other.
|
|
4,458 posts
|
Post by poster J on Nov 12, 2021 22:01:49 GMT
If doing one free test stops people from booking, those people didn't really want to go anyway. Not sure about that. Lateral flow tests are not exactly pleasant things. And many people do simply find things like that difficult and there is no free or even cheap way to grt someone to do it for you. If a person can't deal with an unpleasant sensation for literally 30 seconds max they will really struggle with so many things in life. And just because something is a tiny bit unpleasant isn't an excuse to throw a selfish childish tantrum about doing it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2021 22:05:19 GMT
I have, many times. Wimbledon too. I'm triple jabbed and I am PCRd regularly but that's beside the point, I would never even consider testing positive and then lying about that result just so I could go out for the night. It's a level of stupidity and selfishness that I'm genuinely surprised someone would even suggest. I was actually going to ask if you insisted on the ppl next to you testing before taking their seat For me personally, that’s a very different situation. My objection comes from someone deliberately evading a safety precaution that’s being enforced for everybody’s protection.
|
|
4,458 posts
|
Post by poster J on Nov 12, 2021 22:07:04 GMT
I'm not mocking anything, I don't know where you got that idea from. People's safety should just be put above one person's '''right''' to see the show, especially if that person is ill and infectious. I do think testing should be mandatory at all venues, but I don't make the rules. By saying 'just so they don't lose out on the cost of a train ticket' you are belittling the amount and making it seem irrelevant. Its a substantial amount of money for many people. I don't disagree to a point, but then theatres should have done this from the start, like air travel and border control, so you know that when you book there is a risk you may not be able to go. This should have been a nationwide agreement across all venues.Instead we have had a summer of people showing vaccine proof and being allowed, or in many venues cases not even checking that. Nothing is ever guaranteed. You could be hit by a car, your train could be cancelled, there could be a freak flood. All risks you take when you book anything, and all would again cause you to miss out. The booking conditions clearly stated proof of Covid status would be required, so the Playhouse are entirely within their rights to make people test. That is the risk every single person who bought a ticket took. If they chose to interpret the conditions a different way then that is their choice, but it doesn't make what the theatre is doing illegal. On the contrary, it is not only legal but morally responsible. Individual rights must be balanced against the greater public good.
|
|
310 posts
|
Post by showoff on Nov 12, 2021 22:08:20 GMT
Do you think you should be advising this? Morally, are you OK with this? So advising someone who is positive to go out and spread it to potentially vulnerable people who could die or get very sick and live with long COVID? You're OK with that? Hardly advertising, a tiny % of the population read this forum...i first saw it mentioned on a Wimbledon forum, so I'm not the only one thinking about it What does it matter how many people read the forum, you advise just one person who tests positive to go anyway and fake their results you're helping put people's lives at risk. Jesus.
|
|
4,458 posts
|
Post by poster J on Nov 12, 2021 22:10:44 GMT
Do you think you should be advising this? Morally, are you OK with this? So advising someone who is positive to go out and spread it to potentially vulnerable people who could die or get very sick and live with long COVID? You're OK with that? Hardly advertising, a tiny % of the population read this forum...i first saw it mentioned on a Wimbledon forum, so I'm not the only one thinking about it It's always a shame to be reminded that some people appear to have no social conscience at all, but even more depressing when they openly admit it. Your selfishness is beyond incomprehensible.
|
|
180 posts
|
Post by saral on Nov 12, 2021 22:11:58 GMT
So where do we draw the line, the person next to me on the train doesn't need to test before getting on the train and i would be sitting next to them longer than being in the theatre
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2021 22:18:25 GMT
So where do we draw the line, the person next to me on the train doesn't need to test before getting on the train and i would be sitting next to them longer than being in the theatre I think you’re missing the point. It’s about eliminating the risk as much as possible, nobody believes they can exist in 2021 without there being a chance of being exposed to a single positive case. It’s damage limitation. Also, it’s more about what you can do as an individual, for others. What we are discussing here is deceit.
|
|
|
Post by floorshow on Nov 12, 2021 22:20:58 GMT
So where do we draw the line, the person next to me on the train doesn't need to test before getting on the train and i would be sitting next to them longer than being in the theatre The line is spelled out to you in clear language when you book the tickets. Or get on the train. Or enter the shop. Or go to a hospital. That's the line. Beyond the line is your respect for others and actually understanding why the line is there and it's impact. There are only 2 types of people who have an issue with the line, those who are genuinely medically exempt and the ignorant. No-one else can tell the difference from afar but I would hope we do all know the truth about ourselves inside.
|
|
2,805 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Nov 13, 2021 1:57:38 GMT
|
|
7,491 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Nov 13, 2021 10:00:55 GMT
I walked past last night on my way to the ENO and saw what looked like a large group of students (MT students maybe) waiting outside to go in. The outside of the theatre looks great. Nothing to say its the Playhouse Theatre, just a subtle Kit Kat Club sign over the main entrance. The glass on the entrance doors is blacked out and there are no cast posters or, in fact, anything saying Cabaret. It looks like a discrete club which, I am guessing, is what they are aiming at.
|
|
277 posts
|
Post by fossil on Nov 13, 2021 17:47:52 GMT
Unlike most venues that will accept proof of double vaccination, entry to Cabaret will only be allowed on presentation of "NHS-Self Report Tool confirmation email and/or text message" following a lateral flow or PCR test.
People attending Cabaret who do not already have a test kit and would normally have no reason to obtain one (e.g. no contact with an infected person or not visiting a care home, etc.) will now doubt be going to their nearest pharmacy to pick up a free NHS kit of 7 tests. The government have already spent over £3.2billion on test kits (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/774805/response/1852394/attach/html/3/FOI1347531.pdf.html). The FT have in the past estimated the kits as costing between £5 and £30 each.
Tickets at eye watering prices seem to be selling well for this show so a good profit stands to be made for the producers in time. It would be reasonable to conclude that many thousands of extra test kits will be supplied to audience members - all free of charge - by the NHS. I would be interested in peoples opinion on this. Would it be unreasonable in believing it would be an appropriate gesture for the producers to (once they are in profit) make a contribution to the NHS for the significant extra costs they are causing to be incurred?
|
|
7,491 posts
|
Post by alece10 on Nov 13, 2021 18:01:18 GMT
There are lots of instances where a negative test is required. For example a friend is attending a meeting at a Cancer charity next week and has to do a lateral flow test before attending. So should that charity also make a donation to the government? We have all paid for these test kits indirectly out of our income tax so I don't see why a company asking for proof of test should have to contribute further.
|
|
|
Post by A.Ham on Nov 13, 2021 18:35:42 GMT
I believe the test kits are funded from the £37bn allocated to Test & Trace, so without wanting to be too political about it, at least audience members confirming their negative status and being allowed entry to the Kit Kat Club will mean some benefit has been delivered for that vast sum!
|
|
|
Post by floorshow on Nov 13, 2021 18:41:51 GMT
I would have thought the gov is more concerned about money moving around and restoring the economy by enabling places to open - the revenue and wider benefits generated by this must significantly outweigh the cost of LFTs for punters.
Dunno how you balance the opportunity to make a charitable donation against making up for a year of going dark or reducing ticket prices though I guess that last one is bottom of the priorities!
|
|
180 posts
|
Post by saral on Nov 13, 2021 18:45:28 GMT
The government not allowing there free lft's to be used for travel as it's classed as leisure is the complete opposite of allowing them to be used for theatre trips
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2021 18:49:31 GMT
My FOMO has got the best of me. Just had a look for tickets for this in the early weeks. There seems to be a lot of stalls tickets, tables for two. Are they returns? Or did they never sell?
|
|
18,775 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Nov 13, 2021 19:25:16 GMT
I walked past last night on my way to the ENO and saw what looked like a large group of students (MT students maybe) waiting outside to go in. The outside of the theatre looks great. Nothing to say its the Playhouse Theatre, just a subtle Kit Kat Club sign over the main entrance. The glass on the entrance doors is blacked out and there are no cast posters or, in fact, anything saying Cabaret. It looks like a discrete club which, I am guessing, is what they are aiming at. This and the promos depicting a seedy nightclub are far the most interesting things I’ve heard about this production. The star names? Sorry couldn’t give a toss about either of them, and I think the show itself just isn’t that good. I always come out feeling cheated/disappointed. BUT if they’ve recreated a dirty, low rent, sleazy vibe with a grubby/sexy looking ensemble I might give this thing one more try. Maybe?
|
|
6,276 posts
|
Post by Jon on Nov 13, 2021 19:32:53 GMT
This and the promos depicting a seedy nightclub are far the most interesting things I’ve heard about this production. The star names? Sorry couldn’t give a toss about either of them, and I think the show itself just isn’t that good. I always come out feeling cheated/disappointed. BUT if they’ve recreated a dirty, low rent, sleazy vibe with a grubby/sexy looking ensemble I might give this thing one more try. Maybe? It's not the first time they've done that for Cabaret as a concept. I'm more curious about Jessie Buckley's Sally because we know she can sing but I wonder if she'll play Sally as an average singer who the audience isn't shocked that she's in this dive or play it like Liza who in the film who clearly chose to be at the Kit Kat Club but easily could have ended somewhere nicer.
|
|