>
> > You can tell me, because you think it is bullshit, that
> > Jim is not who Jim really is, and you can tell me that
> > things you want to be true are true, and things you don't
> > want to be true aren't true, and your statements are, as
> > you say, bollocks. I am not going to go without my comment
> > here, that my entire lifetime of life experience and
> > training, little as it is in comparison with
> > professionals, is untrue. Broadway is as appealing as it
> > is to those who seek it out because it is the Broadway
> > Community, not the perhaps revolutionistically aspired,
> > Broadway Conglomerate. You can't take over a culture
> > simply by declaring it non-existent.
>
> Do you set yourself a target each day of how much nonsense
> you can say?
>
> I've never said Jim isn't who Jim is, you have
> Mrs.Jimbles.
>
> I'm guessing you didn't care to read fully what I said
> after what you did (it's difficult I know) In short I'll
> summarise, please try and keep up:
>
> You claimed that having 200 investors of a show was
> "the nature of Broadway" and I replied It might
> be for the odd show or two, but it isn't the nature.
>
> Pud
>
I said having 200 investors for a large show is par for the course as is having numerous investors, typically more than 80 on the roles for one show.
That phenomenon of applying investments from unrelated parties into a common pool is the nature of Broadway.
|
