Let’s start off with a little historical perspective. Since the days before there was a Times Square or Broadway, theatre has always catered to the upper classes and the upper middle class. The classics were most common fare for the well educated. Musicals were, in essence, developed for the "tired business man" to look at chorus girls. Burlesque and vaudeville were the entertainment for the working and middle class until radio and film. In the last 20 years, the Broadway audience has, in fact, gotten much more middle class. Secondly, except for the brief period with the WPA and the Living Theater, Broadway has always been a commercial venture. From Junius Brutus Booth to James O'Neill to David Belasco to Oscar Hammerstein to the Shubert Brothers to David Merrick to Disney Theatrical, the primary aim of American Producers is to make a profit. In Britain the theatre is subsidized and hence the lower ticket price but that's not the American model. For an article on modern Broadway investing, go Broadway Backers by Constance Gustke in the 03/01/2004, Worth Magazine. There the basics of how Producers get monies from Investors in return for a potential average return of 38 per cent are detailed. In the 2006-2007 season revenue increased 8.9 percent to a record $939 million in the 12 months ending May 27. This speaks well for the ticket sales side of Broadway. The merchandise and ancillary sales are not disclosed. If the Broadway weren’t making a lot of people a lot of money, there would be a lot of dark houses. Also understand that Mel Brooks had little of his own money in either “The Producers” or “Young Frankenstien”. Robert Sillerman From Clear Channel is part of a large investor pool. One reason Brooks is making so much money was his decision to drop out of the Writers Guild at the start of “The Producers” to avoid paying the 3% fees on all royalties. He was a good union man until it came time for him to contribute to the organization that protects writers. The flaw in your logic is that the business model is broken but demand for tickets is so high you can't afford them. It’s not that I’m not sympathetic. Ticket price is driven by demand. The Producers argue that the need for reduced labor costs (which comprise about 8% of your ticket) is to recoup for their Investors faster. Perhaps once the Investors have been repaid then a portion of each house could be mandated to have x many seats sold at a steep discount. However the Theatre Development Fund Half-Price ticket booth already covers a lot of that area. BTW, despite what Reidel says about them, the rich think the poor suck. Reagan said the poor go to bed hungry because they’re on a diet. That’s just cold.