Opera Australia's in dire trouble. As a former CEO, I think I know why
My recommendation was that this obligation cease and Opera Australia reduce its footprint to seasons at the Sydney Opera House which, after all, is one of the world's most famous buildings and happens to be (kind of, among other things) an opera house. The opera on the harbour could continue but honestly should do so only if the repertoire was there to sustain interest. I have been away from Australia for many years but Guys & Dolls on the harbour? Seriously? What's the point?
The federal funding for the national company should be proportionally reduced and redistributed to the state-based companies and also to one of the Melbourne companies, who all do fine work as it happens. If cutting Melbourne's apron strings was long past due then, it's simply irrational today.
I then turned my mind to the financial challenges that were coming thick and fast. The company had an impressive property portfolio thanks to previous administrations. However, having such non-liquid assets tied up was not helping the day-to-day operations of the company. I recommended rethinking the Surry Hills headquarters. Perhaps a joint venture could be explored with our neighbour – Belvoir Street Theatre – which owned an adjacent building. We could partner with a developer to redesign the whole (large downtown) site to accommodate rehearsal rooms, administration offices and apartments above: both literally and figuratively be that 'beacon on the hill' rightly expected of a supposedly national flagship performing arts company. The notion of having scenery and costume manufacture in such a plum location made no sense at all.
This was especially odd when the company already owned a large scenery storage warehouse in Alexandria which could be fitted out to accommodate manufacturing functions. It could also have easily been possible to offload the Alexandria site and move both manufacturing and storage to a regional base. The Royal Opera House in London builds productions in the Thames estuary and stores productions in Wales, for example.
Frankly, given the dire financial position revealed by Opera Australia's most recent set of accounts, it insults artists, crew and remaining donors for the company to maintain its obdurate and irrational resistance to leveraging for survival, an asset of the magnitude as the company possesses.
And finally to the conundrum of the musical. In my early days, Opera Australia would regularly present Gilbert & Sullivan and Viennese operettas to large, enthusiastic audiences. These productions were cost-effective, a great way to use the chorus and resident principal artists and terrific for the bottom line. Of course, tastes change and the company had to move on. The introduction of large-scale musicals as a co-production with a commercial producer was, for a while, a sensible way to mitigate the rising costs of main-stage opera and a great boost to the box office.
Loading
There were, though, a number of challenges, even in the good old days of my time. Supply of venues was an annual challenge. Sydney and Melbourne were certain; Perth and Adelaide were generally not financially sensible; and Brisbane was possible only should the Queensland Performing Arts Centre be interested in the title. Without a substantial length of season, the cost base made the musical unviable. There was always a concern, as with Handa Opera on the Harbour, that we would run out of titles. Fast forward to now and the company is presenting the aforementioned Guys & Dolls on the harbour and is licking its wounds from a disastrous season of Sunset Boulevard. It's crazy.
The annual musical became the artistic heroin of the company. We knew it was not really what we were supposed to be doing (we were meant to be an opera company, after all) and we were not confident of our supply, but without it, we would be in greater trouble.
As it happened, by the time I left the company to return to London, we were presenting as many performances of the national season of My Fair Lady as all of the main-stage operas combined – surely not a sustainable construct. More importantly, this addiction to musicals dangerously deprecated the company's assumed raison d'être: first and foremost, to present opera. Musicals are not opera.
I have a huge fondness for this company, Opera Australia and I count some of the finest productions of my professional life in its catalogue (Luhrmann's La Bohème, Armfield's Tristan & Isolde) and so I learn of the catalogue of woes from afar with great concern and sadness.
However, none of the issues I've described in this cook's tour of my time at the helm of Opera Australia are new. Many people of goodwill have lent much time and expertise over the years to help the company – it tells us something that surely no art form in Australia has endured more inquiries than opera. So what baffles therefore is how it is that successive boards have either failed to understand or worse, have shown themselves deaf to the need to undertake reforms so obviously necessary to save, not just the company, but the sustainability of the wider arts ecology.
If Opera Australia is indeed our national flagship performing arts company, it needs to conduct itself accordingly because its fortunes affect many. There is no natural right to existence for a publicly subsidised opera company. The company must dig deep and identify exactly who and what it is for. For whom does it exist to serve? Fresh thinking at board level is needed.
I love opera and I love Opera Australia. I sincerely hope a solution can be found. Many opera companies around the world are experiencing similar difficulties but sadly, for our own national company, the problem is particularly acute.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
West Australian
18 hours ago
- West Australian
Titus Day trial: Guy Sebastian ‘honoured' to support Taylor Swift
Guy Sebastian has revealed how excited he was to support global pop star Taylor Swift on her 2013 tour while taking the stand in the trial of his former manager, who is accused of embezzling $640,000 from Mr Sebastian. Titus Emanuel Day is standing trial for allegedly embezzling $640,000 of Mr Sebastian's royalties and performance fees. This includes the alleged failure to remit $187,000 to Mr Sebastian for performances fees as a support act for Swift on her 2013 Red tour of Australia. It's alleged that Mr Sebastian was also not paid for corporate gigs, performances at the Sydney Opera House, a Big Bash game and Dreamworld and for singing at weddings in Italy and Sydney. Mr Day has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of embezzlement as a clerk or servant and one count of attempting to dishonestly obtain financial advantage by deception. He has denied doing anything fraudulent or dishonest. Mr Sebastian told the NSW District Court on Wednesday that he was 'very excited' when Mr Day told him he'd be opening for Swift on her Red tour of Australia in December 2013. 'I was alerted to the fact that I was to be supporting Taylor Swift, which obviously is a big deal – Taylor's a huge artist, and it was a massive get to get that tour,' Mr Sebastian told the court. 'I was really honoured.' Supporting Swift was unlike tours of his own, he said, which at times 'weren't fruitful', as he had to cover all the costs. 'This was an opportunity where it was a guaranteed sum I was being paid,' he explained. Mr Sebastian told the court that he 'wanted to do a really good job' and had even flown in a friend of his to perform alongside him. 'I really made that band as slamming as I possibly could and wanted to do a really good job of this,' he said. Mr Sebastian was going to be paid about $500,000 for the tour but had to pay costs of about $180,000 that included the price of pulling the 'slamming' band together. The court was previously told about $494,000 was paid into an account of Mr Day's 6 Degrees management company by a booking agent following the Swift tour. The Crown alleges Mr Day was entitled to a $59,000 commission, leaving Mr Sebastian the remaining $435,000. However, Mr Day allegedly failed to remit $187,000, with Mr Sebastian only paid about $247,5000. Mr Sebastian told the court on Wednesday that money was supposed to be remitted within a week or two of any performance. 'Within seven or 14 days, but it was clearly indicated to us when the $247,000 was transferred that there was going to be a reconciliation on weeks of the whole tour … we were told that the full reconciliation would be done really soon,' Mr Sebastian told the court. He claimed there were several attempts from his bookkeepers to try to understand the reconciliation for the performances in order to complete a tax return; however, this allegedly was 'never received'. In the years following, Mr Sebastian said he 'assumed it was taken care of'. Mr Day's barrister, Thomas Woods, last week told the court that there would be 'no dispute' that on some occasions his client should have transferred money onto Mr Sebastian 'but did not'. 'For many of the charges, the real question is not going to be whether my client failed to transfer the money to Mr Sebastian but whether his failure to do that was criminal,' Mr Woods said. Mr Sebastian signed with Mr Day at his management company 6 Degrees three years after he won Australian Idol, having previously worked with him at Mr Day's former agency, 22 Management. Despite initially being happy with the arrangement, Mr Sebastian and his team were often chasing statements and clarification on payments before he told Mr Day he was leaving his management in 2017, the court was previously told. Mr Sebastian launched Federal Court proceedings against Mr Day the following year. He in turn filed a counterclaim. The trial continues.
Sydney Morning Herald
23-05-2025
- Sydney Morning Herald
Opera Australia's in dire trouble. As a former CEO, I think I know why
My recommendation was that this obligation cease and Opera Australia reduce its footprint to seasons at the Sydney Opera House which, after all, is one of the world's most famous buildings and happens to be (kind of, among other things) an opera house. The opera on the harbour could continue but honestly should do so only if the repertoire was there to sustain interest. I have been away from Australia for many years but Guys & Dolls on the harbour? Seriously? What's the point? The federal funding for the national company should be proportionally reduced and redistributed to the state-based companies and also to one of the Melbourne companies, who all do fine work as it happens. If cutting Melbourne's apron strings was long past due then, it's simply irrational today. I then turned my mind to the financial challenges that were coming thick and fast. The company had an impressive property portfolio thanks to previous administrations. However, having such non-liquid assets tied up was not helping the day-to-day operations of the company. I recommended rethinking the Surry Hills headquarters. Perhaps a joint venture could be explored with our neighbour – Belvoir Street Theatre – which owned an adjacent building. We could partner with a developer to redesign the whole (large downtown) site to accommodate rehearsal rooms, administration offices and apartments above: both literally and figuratively be that 'beacon on the hill' rightly expected of a supposedly national flagship performing arts company. The notion of having scenery and costume manufacture in such a plum location made no sense at all. This was especially odd when the company already owned a large scenery storage warehouse in Alexandria which could be fitted out to accommodate manufacturing functions. It could also have easily been possible to offload the Alexandria site and move both manufacturing and storage to a regional base. The Royal Opera House in London builds productions in the Thames estuary and stores productions in Wales, for example. Frankly, given the dire financial position revealed by Opera Australia's most recent set of accounts, it insults artists, crew and remaining donors for the company to maintain its obdurate and irrational resistance to leveraging for survival, an asset of the magnitude as the company possesses. And finally to the conundrum of the musical. In my early days, Opera Australia would regularly present Gilbert & Sullivan and Viennese operettas to large, enthusiastic audiences. These productions were cost-effective, a great way to use the chorus and resident principal artists and terrific for the bottom line. Of course, tastes change and the company had to move on. The introduction of large-scale musicals as a co-production with a commercial producer was, for a while, a sensible way to mitigate the rising costs of main-stage opera and a great boost to the box office. Loading There were, though, a number of challenges, even in the good old days of my time. Supply of venues was an annual challenge. Sydney and Melbourne were certain; Perth and Adelaide were generally not financially sensible; and Brisbane was possible only should the Queensland Performing Arts Centre be interested in the title. Without a substantial length of season, the cost base made the musical unviable. There was always a concern, as with Handa Opera on the Harbour, that we would run out of titles. Fast forward to now and the company is presenting the aforementioned Guys & Dolls on the harbour and is licking its wounds from a disastrous season of Sunset Boulevard. It's crazy. The annual musical became the artistic heroin of the company. We knew it was not really what we were supposed to be doing (we were meant to be an opera company, after all) and we were not confident of our supply, but without it, we would be in greater trouble. As it happened, by the time I left the company to return to London, we were presenting as many performances of the national season of My Fair Lady as all of the main-stage operas combined – surely not a sustainable construct. More importantly, this addiction to musicals dangerously deprecated the company's assumed raison d'être: first and foremost, to present opera. Musicals are not opera. I have a huge fondness for this company, Opera Australia and I count some of the finest productions of my professional life in its catalogue (Luhrmann's La Bohème, Armfield's Tristan & Isolde) and so I learn of the catalogue of woes from afar with great concern and sadness. However, none of the issues I've described in this cook's tour of my time at the helm of Opera Australia are new. Many people of goodwill have lent much time and expertise over the years to help the company – it tells us something that surely no art form in Australia has endured more inquiries than opera. So what baffles therefore is how it is that successive boards have either failed to understand or worse, have shown themselves deaf to the need to undertake reforms so obviously necessary to save, not just the company, but the sustainability of the wider arts ecology. If Opera Australia is indeed our national flagship performing arts company, it needs to conduct itself accordingly because its fortunes affect many. There is no natural right to existence for a publicly subsidised opera company. The company must dig deep and identify exactly who and what it is for. For whom does it exist to serve? Fresh thinking at board level is needed. I love opera and I love Opera Australia. I sincerely hope a solution can be found. Many opera companies around the world are experiencing similar difficulties but sadly, for our own national company, the problem is particularly acute.
The Age
23-05-2025
- The Age
Opera Australia's in dire trouble. As a former CEO, I think I know why
My recommendation was that this obligation cease and Opera Australia reduce its footprint to seasons at the Sydney Opera House which, after all, is one of the world's most famous buildings and happens to be (kind of, among other things) an opera house. The opera on the harbour could continue but honestly should do so only if the repertoire was there to sustain interest. I have been away from Australia for many years but Guys & Dolls on the harbour? Seriously? What's the point? The federal funding for the national company should be proportionally reduced and redistributed to the state-based companies and also to one of the Melbourne companies, who all do fine work as it happens. If cutting Melbourne's apron strings was long past due then, it's simply irrational today. I then turned my mind to the financial challenges that were coming thick and fast. The company had an impressive property portfolio thanks to previous administrations. However, having such non-liquid assets tied up was not helping the day-to-day operations of the company. I recommended rethinking the Surry Hills headquarters. Perhaps a joint venture could be explored with our neighbour – Belvoir Street Theatre – which owned an adjacent building. We could partner with a developer to redesign the whole (large downtown) site to accommodate rehearsal rooms, administration offices and apartments above: both literally and figuratively be that 'beacon on the hill' rightly expected of a supposedly national flagship performing arts company. The notion of having scenery and costume manufacture in such a plum location made no sense at all. This was especially odd when the company already owned a large scenery storage warehouse in Alexandria which could be fitted out to accommodate manufacturing functions. It could also have easily been possible to offload the Alexandria site and move both manufacturing and storage to a regional base. The Royal Opera House in London builds productions in the Thames estuary and stores productions in Wales, for example. Frankly, given the dire financial position revealed by Opera Australia's most recent set of accounts, it insults artists, crew and remaining donors for the company to maintain its obdurate and irrational resistance to leveraging for survival, an asset of the magnitude as the company possesses. And finally to the conundrum of the musical. In my early days, Opera Australia would regularly present Gilbert & Sullivan and Viennese operettas to large, enthusiastic audiences. These productions were cost-effective, a great way to use the chorus and resident principal artists and terrific for the bottom line. Of course, tastes change and the company had to move on. The introduction of large-scale musicals as a co-production with a commercial producer was, for a while, a sensible way to mitigate the rising costs of main-stage opera and a great boost to the box office. Loading There were, though, a number of challenges, even in the good old days of my time. Supply of venues was an annual challenge. Sydney and Melbourne were certain; Perth and Adelaide were generally not financially sensible; and Brisbane was possible only should the Queensland Performing Arts Centre be interested in the title. Without a substantial length of season, the cost base made the musical unviable. There was always a concern, as with Handa Opera on the Harbour, that we would run out of titles. Fast forward to now and the company is presenting the aforementioned Guys & Dolls on the harbour and is licking its wounds from a disastrous season of Sunset Boulevard. It's crazy. The annual musical became the artistic heroin of the company. We knew it was not really what we were supposed to be doing (we were meant to be an opera company, after all) and we were not confident of our supply, but without it, we would be in greater trouble. As it happened, by the time I left the company to return to London, we were presenting as many performances of the national season of My Fair Lady as all of the main-stage operas combined – surely not a sustainable construct. More importantly, this addiction to musicals dangerously deprecated the company's assumed raison d'être: first and foremost, to present opera. Musicals are not opera. I have a huge fondness for this company, Opera Australia and I count some of the finest productions of my professional life in its catalogue (Luhrmann's La Bohème, Armfield's Tristan & Isolde) and so I learn of the catalogue of woes from afar with great concern and sadness. However, none of the issues I've described in this cook's tour of my time at the helm of Opera Australia are new. Many people of goodwill have lent much time and expertise over the years to help the company – it tells us something that surely no art form in Australia has endured more inquiries than opera. So what baffles therefore is how it is that successive boards have either failed to understand or worse, have shown themselves deaf to the need to undertake reforms so obviously necessary to save, not just the company, but the sustainability of the wider arts ecology. If Opera Australia is indeed our national flagship performing arts company, it needs to conduct itself accordingly because its fortunes affect many. There is no natural right to existence for a publicly subsidised opera company. The company must dig deep and identify exactly who and what it is for. For whom does it exist to serve? Fresh thinking at board level is needed. I love opera and I love Opera Australia. I sincerely hope a solution can be found. Many opera companies around the world are experiencing similar difficulties but sadly, for our own national company, the problem is particularly acute.
