Subsidies for 2010: €15,781,767.87. Spectators season 2010-2011: 143,787. Even if you allow for some of the 2011 spend coming from 2011’s subsidy, which is reduced, you’re still probably talking over €100 pp.
Their total budget was €16,081,767.87, so they took roughly 98% subsidy. I don’t know the finances of Spanish companies, but the British National Theatre generates roughly half of income from box office. How much do other regional/national companies (eg Madrid) get per punter? Is their crap as bad as Sergi Belbel’s?
Would you continue spending 15 million on nights out for the oligarchy, or would you, for example, choose to do something about child poverty (ca 25%), which, by damaging the educational prospects of those affected, is going to be a major drag on the region’s future competitiveness?
(You could of course simply return the money to taxpayers and let them make up their own minds about how to spend it. Fat chance.)
Similar posts
Back soon
Let them eat cake. Flags before food.
I believe the correct idiom is “No bread but (basically unaffordable) circus (for some)”
–(You could of course simply return the money to taxpayers and let them make up their own minds about how to spend it. Fat chance.)–
Or you could just not let the guv have it in the first place – what everybody does anyway.
Starve the guv, eat the rich?
Didn’t we have the AVE case recently?
http://politica.elpais.com/politica/2011/06/27/actualidad/1309189830_331278.html
(Economists among you will just love the last-but-one para.)
Lotsa circus to go with.
Subsidies for other years are similar so I don’t think there’s a capital investment component that you’ve missed. What you have missed is the fact that the budget is quite a lot smaller than the subsidy + income from tickets. Is that surplus being hoarded away somewhere or a rainy day, in which case why hasn’t the subsidy being reduced (the building’s in good condition anyway)? Or has it been disappearing into associates’ pockets, like the millions from the Palau de la Mùsica?