The following appeared in an e-mail sent by the marketing director of the Classical Shakespeare Theatre of Bardville."Over the past ten years, there has been a 20 percent decline in the size of the average audience at Classical Shakespeare Theatre product

In order to properly evaluate the argument made by the marketing director, greater clarity is needed in several areas. In the propasal as presented, the author of the e-mail makes several assumptions. Without more information about the similarities and differences between the Avon Repertory Company and the Bardville Theatre, as well as with regard to the reason that the opposing organization saw increased profits, the conclusion that Bardville's profits will rise due to starting a 'Shakespeare in the Park' program are not well founded. Additional insight as to the reason for the declining audience numbers would also be of use.

The first area in need of greater attention is the reason for the increase in profits experienced by the Avon group. Their profits increased by ten percent after beginning their 'Free Plays in the Park' program, but it is an unfounded assumption to think that this program must be the reason for that gain. It will need to be shown that the new program, and not another program or some external force, was the cause behind their increased revenue. If the park program was not the catalyst for their newfound success, then there is no reason to expect a similar result when a park program is implemented in author's own theatre and there are no grounds on which to pursue the matter further.

The second area that will need to be more carefully explored is that of the comparison of the two theater companies. It is not necessarily logical to assume that simply because a tactic worked for one company it will work for another. True, both are theater groups, but the possible differences amongst theaters and their audiences are many. Do they boast similar shows? Are the audience demographics similar? Without knowing more on these points, it is unreasonable to expect an identical result in the Bardville Theatre.

The final area worthy of further research is the reason for the decline in attendance at the Bardville Theatre over the last decade. If the Bardville Theatre specializes in Shakespeare, and overall public interest in Shakespeare is waning, then neither greater advertising nor a 'Shakespeare in the Park' program is going to save the theatre. If this is found to be the case, then the company would be better served by changing the sort of production that they put on to better match the appetite of the masses. A marketing director should be well aware of basic economics, and should therefore realize that they will see no increased profits by providing more of a service that is not in demand.

The marketing director will need to do significantly more investigation before the suggestion that was made in the e-mail could be considered credible. If the gains seen by the Avon group are due to their park program, the Bardville Theatre is significantly similar to the Avon Repertory Company, and the decline in audience size is shown to be due to a lack of public awareness, then the suggestion has merit. If any of these criteria are not met, then the suggestion to start a park program should be reconsidered.