The Washington Ballet

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Julie Kent has made the financial situation much worse. She receives a big salary and lives rent free but she has spent money the organization doesn’t have.

Too early to know. I’m sorry but Webre caused the problems. Spending money to pull back out is a typical arts not for profit strategy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Julie Kent has made the financial situation much worse. She receives a big salary and lives rent free but she has spent money the organization doesn’t have.

Too early to know. I’m sorry but Webre caused the problems. Spending money to pull back out is a typical arts not for profit strategy.

I don’t understand. Could you please explain this concept?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Julie Kent has made the financial situation much worse. She receives a big salary and lives rent free but she has spent money the organization doesn’t have.

Too early to know. I’m sorry but Webre caused the problems. Spending money to pull back out is a typical arts not for profit strategy.

I don’t understand. Could you please explain this concept?

I also don’t understand. The leadership needs to be fiscally responsible. And driving the organization into massive debt is not a responsible strategy. If you pull up public tax records, you will see for yourself that Kent, not Webre, caused the current problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Julie Kent has made the financial situation much worse. She receives a big salary and lives rent free but she has spent money the organization doesn’t have.

Too early to know. I’m sorry but Webre caused the problems. Spending money to pull back out is a typical arts not for profit strategy.

I don’t understand. Could you please explain this concept?

I also don’t understand. The leadership needs to be fiscally responsible. And driving the organization into massive debt is not a responsible strategy. If you pull up public tax records, you will see for yourself that Kent, not Webre, caused the current problems.

I’m sorry but I’ve been in the business in DC for years and it is well known that The company wasn’t doing well. Kent did not take it off the rails in a year. Sorry, but that’s just not a thing.
Ballet and opera and the symphony are all
Struggling. I sat across the table from the big wigs at the KC and they literally showed us their books.
I don’t know what the answer is, but tightening the belt isn’t necessarily the way to get back into the black. Sometimes you have to reinvest and spend some money to grow your audience and encourage new underwriting. Because please understand, ticket sales aren’t what gets it done. Corporate sponsors are single handedly keeping the arts afloat in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Julie Kent has made the financial situation much worse. She receives a big salary and lives rent free but she has spent money the organization doesn’t have.

Too early to know. I’m sorry but Webre caused the problems. Spending money to pull back out is a typical arts not for profit strategy.

I don’t understand. Could you please explain this concept?

I also don’t understand. The leadership needs to be fiscally responsible. And driving the organization into massive debt is not a responsible strategy. If you pull up public tax records, you will see for yourself that Kent, not Webre, caused the current problems.

I’m sorry but I’ve been in the business in DC for years and it is well known that The company wasn’t doing well. Kent did not take it off the rails in a year. Sorry, but that’s just not a thing.
Ballet and opera and the symphony are all
Struggling. I sat across the table from the big wigs at the KC and they literally showed us their books.
I don’t know what the answer is, but tightening the belt isn’t necessarily the way to get back into the black. Sometimes you have to reinvest and spend some money to grow your audience and encourage new underwriting. Because please understand, ticket sales aren’t what gets it done. Corporate sponsors are single handedly keeping the arts afloat in the US.

There is some truth to the fact that there was overspending going on when Septime was there, I will give you that. But Kent has come in and thrown things into a deeper state of revenue crisis. And I agree that sometimes you need to take risks to attract new donors and ticket holders, but Kent has turned off many donors and ticket sales have DECREASED during her 2.5 years in her position. They are into their 3rd year, and things are worse, not better. Additionally, the school is a mess, which is further causing revenue issues. It used to be that the school generated a lot of income that the company could tap into, but that number has decreased steadily as enrollment has dropped- even with the addition of classes. Doing more of what has been done in the past 2.5 years is not likely to turn this organization around.

[Anonymous]

They would sell a lot of KC tickets if they would annually/semiannually include a show that included students from the ballet school, like Alice in Wonderland. Those of us who had children in the show as supernumeraries generally cannot resist buying tix to as many shows as we can afford!

I know ABT has students from TWSB as supers in their upcoming KC performance.

Just like the Nutcracker model for generating ticket sales.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They would sell a lot of KC tickets if they would annually/semiannually include a show that included students from the ballet school, like Alice in Wonderland. Those of us who had children in the show as supernumeraries generally cannot resist buying tix to as many shows as we can afford!

I know ABT has students from TWSB as supers in their upcoming KC performance.

Just like the Nutcracker model for generating ticket sales.

That was something Webre did. That’s not of real interest to Kent. Webre loved children and the students of the school. He loved incorporating them into his works. Kent- not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Julie Kent has made the financial situation much worse. She receives a big salary and lives rent free but she has spent money the organization doesn’t have.

Too early to know. I’m sorry but Webre caused the problems. Spending money to pull back out is a typical arts not for profit strategy.

I don’t understand. Could you please explain this concept?

I also don’t understand. The leadership needs to be fiscally responsible. And driving the organization into massive debt is not a responsible strategy. If you pull up public tax records, you will see for yourself that Kent, not Webre, caused the current problems.

I’m sorry but I’ve been in the business in DC for years and it is well known that The company wasn’t doing well. Kent did not take it off the rails in a year. Sorry, but that’s just not a thing.
Ballet and opera and the symphony are all
Struggling. I sat across the table from the big wigs at the KC and they literally showed us their books.
I don’t know what the answer is, but tightening the belt isn’t necessarily the way to get back into the black. Sometimes you have to reinvest and spend some money to grow your audience and encourage new underwriting. Because please understand, ticket sales aren’t what gets it done. Corporate sponsors are single handedly keeping the arts afloat in the US.

There is some truth to the fact that there was overspending going on when Septime was there, I will give you that. But Kent has come in and thrown things into a deeper state of revenue crisis. And I agree that sometimes you need to take risks to attract new donors and ticket holders, but Kent has turned off many donors and ticket sales have DECREASED during her 2.5 years in her position. They are into their 3rd year, and things are worse, not better. Additionally, the school is a mess, which is further causing revenue issues. It used to be that the school generated a lot of income that the company could tap into, but that number has decreased steadily as enrollment has dropped- even with the addition of classes. Doing more of what has been done in the past 2.5 years is not likely to turn this organization around.

Agreed. It seems like going back to classical works is the opposite of taking a risk; it's pure regression. Pieces like the SF Ballet's piece on social media, Justin Peck's stuff are new and exciting, and tend to do very well at the KC, to my pleasant surprise.

From talking to people familiar with TWB, I'm told that the WaPo author was never a fan of them, and I definitely got a bit of a mean girl vibe from the piece. However, doing something because "that's all [you] know" and not giving the schoolkids a small part in the productions also seems off-putting, since parents will pay big bucks to see their kids on stage, as a PP said.

[Anonymous]

Is there a backstory on why the WaPo writer doesn’t like the Washington Ballet? I find it odd that her prejudice would transfer from Webre to Julie Kent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there a backstory on why the WaPo writer doesn’t like the Washington Ballet? I find it odd that her prejudice would transfer from Webre to Julie Kent.

Sarah Kaufman was actually very generous with her early reviews of TWB- I was very surprised to see how negative this last article was. But I think the cat’s out of the bag and Kaufman has exposed what many insiders already knew to be true. The Board brought in two people who are completely inexperienced. And there is an arrogance to Julie Kent that many people find very unfortunate. It certainly isn’t helping her cause.

[Anonymous]

Septime left on a good note, right? What about Mr. Han (HOS)?

[Anonymous]

It rubs me the wrong way to hear posters complain about Kent’s compensation. Good for her. Plenty over paid blowhard male directors out there. Glad for ladies to have a turn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It rubs me the wrong way to hear posters complain about Kent’s compensation. Good for her. Plenty over paid blowhard male directors out there. Glad for ladies to have a turn.

I remember Julie Kent. She was a dancer and in the movie Center Stage! When did she transition into managing ballet companies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Septime left on a good note, right? What about Mr. Han (HOS)?

They both parted on good terms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It rubs me the wrong way to hear posters complain about Kent’s compensation. Good for her. Plenty over paid blowhard male directors out there. Glad for ladies to have a turn.

I remember Julie Kent. She was a dancer and in the movie Center Stage! When did she transition into managing ballet companies?

When she got the job at The Washington Ballet.