Connect with us

Business

How the ‘Wicked’ Movies Boosted the Musical’s Broadway Sales

Published

on

How the ‘Wicked’ Movies Boosted the Musical’s Broadway Sales

Oct. 30, 2003

Broadway Opening

Advertisement

Kristin Chenoweth and Idina Menzel in the Broadway debut of “Wicked” at the Gershwin Theater.

“Wicked” is an undisputed juggernaut — one of the biggest productions in musical theater history. The stage show, by the composer Stephen Schwartz and the librettist Winnie Holzman, has grossed $1.8 billion on Broadway, and $6.2 billion globally. Worldwide, it has been seen by more than 72 million people.

But none of that was a foregone conclusion. Based on Gregory Maguire’s 1995 novel, which in turn was based on L. Frank Baum’s “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz,” the musical had a so-so reception during its pre-Broadway run in San Francisco in the spring of 2003. In New York that fall, it divided critics when it opened on Broadway at the Gershwin Theater, starring Idina Menzel as the green-skinned “wicked witch,” Elphaba, and Kristin Chenoweth as her frenemy, Glinda, a.k.a. the Good Witch of the South. (“There’s Trouble in Emerald City” was the headline on the review in The New York Times.)

Advertisement

“You wake up the morning after opening night, and some of those notices were pretty devastating, and you think, ‘Oh, well, this is the final word,’” Mantello said. “But then the audiences are telling you a completely different story.”

Advertisement

Menzel performed “Defying Gravity” at the 2004 Tony Awards, and took home the prize for best leading actress in a musical.

The production pretty quickly became a fan favorite, and over the years, audiences made the show their own. The “Wizard of Oz” base was, of course, a huge factor — the 1939 film is a much-loved American classic — but, also, the musical’s depiction of female friendship became a central part of its allure, and kept audiences returning for repeat viewings.

Advertisement

March 23, 2006

1,000th Broadway Performance

“Once word kicked in, it took on a life that none of us could have ever predicted,” Mantello said. “It was the audience, and not a critical consensus, that turned it into the hit that it became.”

Advertisement

It’s a hit! Fans waiting for Menzel’s autograph outside the Gershwin Theater in May 2004.

Menzel, the original Elphaba, won a Tony Award for best leading actress in a musical in 2004. In 2005, the day before her final performance, she fell through a trap door onstage; she couldn’t perform at her last show, but made a cameo in a red tracksuit.

Advertisement

Sept. 27, 2006

‘Wicked’ International

The show expanded rapidly, and now has a global footprint. The London production opened in September 2006, after the prior year’s introduction of a North American tour and a production in Chicago, where it ran for three and a half years. Los Angeles, Japan and Germany began in 2007; and Australia in 2008. In the years since, productions have run in the Netherlands, Mexico, South Korea and Brazil; productions are still running in London and South Korea, and touring in North America.

Advertisement

A South Korean production featured, in 2016, Jeong Sun-ah and Cha Ji-yeon.

Oct. 30, 2018

Another Milestone: 15 Years

Advertisement

The 15th anniversary cast included Amanda Jane Cooper as Glinda and Jessica Vosk as Elphaba.

Advertisement

In 2018, the show celebrated its 15th anniversary, a milestone achieved by few shows. And “Wicked” has continued to outpace its peers: It has since become the fourth-longest-running production in Broadway history, following “The Phantom of the Opera,” “Chicago” and the top-grossing show, “The Lion King.”

Sept. 14, 2021

‘Wicked’ Reopens After the Shutdown

Advertisement

The show reopened with Ginna Claire Mason as Glinda.

Advertisement

Broadway shows were closed from the spring of 2020 through the fall of 2021 because of the coronavirus pandemic. In August 2021, the touring production of “Wicked” restarted in Dallas — the first Broadway touring production to do so — and in September 2021 “Wicked” reopened on Broadway.

Dec. 7, 2022

Yes, We’re Making a Movie

The idea of adapting “Wicked” for the screen goes way back. In fact, it predates the stage musical. Universal Pictures had optioned the novel but couldn’t figure out how to turn it into a film, and agreed to let Schwartz, working with Holzman, develop it into a stage musical first. (Universal didn’t miss out; it is one of the lead producers of the stage musical, along with Marc Platt and David Stone.)

Advertisement

Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande rehearsing “Popular” in September 2022.

Advertisement

Once the stage production became a ginormous hit, the film adaptation was an inevitability, but still there were false starts, abandoned schedules and creative-team overhauls along the way. News coverage of a film adaptation began in 2010; at one point, the director Stephen Daldry was attached and a 2019 release was announced; in 2021 Jon M. Chu became the director, and the next year he said it would be split into two films.

Grande and Erivo had both become fans via the stage show. Grande saw it with her grandmother on Broadway in 2004 (and met Chenoweth backstage); Erivo saw the London production when she was a student.

Advertisement

Feb. 11, 2024

Marketing Saturation

The “Wicked” films’ rollout began in earnest in early 2024, with a trailer that ran during the Super Bowl, and the actresses were ubiquitous throughout that year, including in promotional spots that aired during the Paris Summer Olympics. (NBC Universal, the parent company of Universal Pictures, has the American broadcasting right to the Games.)

The marketing budgets for most Hollywood films are vastly larger than those for Broadway shows. In this case, because there are two films — one released last year and one released last month — the marketing campaigns, as well as publicity and news coverage, was doubled. The films had an estimated marketing budget of at least $125 million each — or $250 million total — along with the numerous brand partnerships that also generated a ton of attention. By contrast, the Broadway show has an annual marketing budget of about $11 million.

Advertisement

Nov. 22, 2024

‘Wicked: Part I’ U.S. Theatrical Release

The movies’ effect on the stage production was significant. In 2023, “Wicked” grossed $97.85 million on Broadway; in 2024 it was up nearly 15 percent, to $112.13 million, and this year it expects to be up another 13.4 percent, to $127.3 million.

Advertisement

The show says the effect in London has also been sizable: It expects London “Wicked” grosses this year to be up 29.4 percent over last year, and last year the grosses were up 10.5 percent over the previous year. (​​The show also holds a record for the highest weekly grosses in West End history, set this year during the week that included New Year’s Day.)

“It’s amazing,” Schwartz said in an interview. “Before the movies came out, I wondered what the impact would be on the show. I don’t think any of us anticipated how strong it would be. You can never plan on this kind of thing, or even hope for it, but it’s really lovely.”

Dec. 25, 2024

$5 Million on Broadway

Advertisement

Actors don harnesses and elaborate wings to portray the flying monkeys who become Elphaba’s allies.

Advertisement

The Broadway production of “Wicked” grossed $5 million over Christmas week last year (just a month after the first film’s release) — it is the first and only Broadway show to gross that much in a single week. (It was also the first show to cross the $2 million mark and the $3 million mark.)

Nov. 21, 2025

‘Wicked: For Good’ U.S. Theatrical Release

What’s next? The second movie was released just before Thanksgiving, giving a second surge for “Wicked” in all its forms, and now the year looks to be ending strong for the stage show. The Broadway production grossed more than $3 million over Thanksgiving week (by comparison, it had generally been grossing $2.3 million to $2.5 million during Thanksgiving weeks that preceded the films’ release). Just around the corner: the Christmas and New Year’s stretch, always a good period for Broadway, and this year, even more so for “Wicked.”

Advertisement

Broadway grosses reflect the most recent box office receipts as reported by the Broadway League. Grosses are not adjusted for inflation.

Images: Sara Krulwich/The New York Times and Universal Pictures.

Advertisement

Videos: CBS; Wicked Musical Korea; Broadway.com; Theater Mania; Ariana Grande; Pink News; Out; FOX; NBC; Universal Pictures.

Produced by Leo Dominguez, Hollis Johnson, Rebecca Lieberman and Josephine Sedgwick. Additional reporting by Leo Dominguez and Jeremy Singer-Vine.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Business

U.S. Trade Deficit Grew in March

Published

on

U.S. Trade Deficit Grew in March

The U.S. trade deficit in goods and services rose to $60.3 billion in March, increasing 4.4 percent from the previous month, after the Supreme Court struck down President Trump’s global tariffs, according to data from the Commerce Department released on Tuesday.

Exports grew 2 percent in the month, to a record $320.9 billion, as the United States exported more oil, soybeans and industrial supplies. The U.S. trade surplus in petroleum hit a record in March, as war with Iran pushed up the price of oil and U.S. energy exports. Imports also gained 2.3 percent in March, to $381.2 billion. The combination increased the monthly trade deficit, the gap between what the United States imports and what it exports.

Tariffs resulted in up-and-down swings in the trade deficit last year. The monthly trade deficit is now somewhat lower than it was in 2024. But overall, the figure hit a record last year, as the United States continued to import high-priced computer chips and weight-loss drugs, and importers stockpiled foreign goods before tariffs took effect.

The data provided the first snapshot of trade since the Supreme Court ruling forced major changes to the Trump administration’s tariff regime.

On Feb. 20, the Supreme Court ruled that Mr. Trump had exceeded his authority last year when he used an emergency law to impose steep tariffs on nearly every nation.

Advertisement

That ruling forced the administration to withdraw the double-digit tariffs it had issued under that law, which varied by country based on bilateral trade deficits. Mr. Trump immediately moved to replace those levies with a flat 10 percent tariff, issued under a legal authority known as Section 122.

The Section 122 tariff will expire in July unless Congress votes to reauthorize it. So the Trump administration has been working on tariffs to replace it. It has started two trade investigations under another legal provision known as Section 301, which allows the president to impose tariffs in response to unfair trade practices.

One of the new investigations would target countries that don’t have laws blocking imports made with forced labor. The other centers on what the administration calls “excess capacity” among 16 of the country’s largest trading partners.

The Trump administration says overproduction in the factory sectors of some foreign countries has resulted in large and persistent U.S. trade deficits with those nations. Representatives from various industries, ranging from sugar to technology to chemicals, are set to testify about the investigation on Tuesday and Wednesday in Washington this week.

Next week, Mr. Trump is expected to visit Beijing, for a meeting with the Chinese leader that will be partly focused on trade. U.S. imports from China have shrunk significantly, as the administration has imposed high tariffs on Chinese goods, and companies have relocated supply chains out of the country.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Commentary: How many Cybertrucks has Tesla sold to the public? Fewer than you might think

Published

on

Commentary: How many Cybertrucks has Tesla sold to the public? Fewer than you might think

How bad are sales of Tesla’s Cybertruck? Nearly 20% of the vehicles went to Elon Musk’s other companies, raising questions about the vehicle’s future

The Cybertruck, Tesla’s would-be competitor in the EV pickup truck market, has long since secured its place as the Edsel of the electric vehicle age.

It’s been derided as unwieldy and ugly and unable to match other pickups in basic functionality. In the colorful take of Tesla critic Will Lockett, it’s “the vehicular form of halitosis” and an “ick’ on four wheels.”

But one doesn’t need words to describe how the Cybertruck has fared among the pickup-buying public; the numbers tell the story.

According to Cox Automotive’s Kelley Blue Book, Tesla sold only 20,237 of the vehicles in 2025, down 48.1% from the 38,965 sold the year before. The slide continued in the first quarter of this year, Cox reported — 3,519 sold, down 45.1% from the 6,406 sold in the year-earlier period.

Advertisement

But there’s more to the story — or to be more precise, less.

In the fourth quarter of 2025, of the 7,071 Cybertruck U.S. registrations, 1,279 went to SpaceX, the rocketship company headed by Tesla boss Elon Musk, which is planning an initial public stock offering sometime this year. An additional 60 were registered by other companies in the Musk empire, namely xAI, Neuralink and the Boring Co.

In other words, nearly 20% of all the Cybertrucks registered in the U.S. in the fourth quarter went to Musk’s companies. Based on the Cybertruck’s starting price of $70,000, that’s the equivalent of $93.7 million in merchandise circulating within Musk’s orbit rather than going to outside buyers.

In the fourth quarter of 2025, of the 7,071 Cybertruck U.S. registrations, 1,279 went to SpaceX

The figures were compiled by S&P Global Mobility and reported by Bloomberg. I asked Tesla to comment but received no reply.

Advertisement

The transfers of Cybertrucks to other Musk companies raise questions about how he conflates the interests of his private companies and his public company (Tesla), arguably to the disadvantage of Tesla shareholders. More on that in a moment.

The sales numbers raise obvious questions about the future of the Cybertruck as part of Tesla’s five-model lineup. They also undermine Musk’s declared faith in the truck. When it was introduced in 2023, Musk asserted that he expected to sell 250,000 to 500,000 Cybertrucks a year once manufacturing capacity was fully engaged.

It would be hard to find market experts who took that prediction seriously, but few probably expected the shortfall to be so steep. Cybertruck’s 48.1% decline in 2025 sales compared with 2024 was the sharpest such decline of any EV in the U.S. market over that period, in which EV sales generally slumped.

Initial Cybertruck sales of 38,965 in 2024 seemed almost to validate Musk’s optimism. But negative perceptions took hold through the year and into 2025, starting with the ridicule the vehicle’s boxy design attracted on the street.

Poor manufacturing quality has prompted U.S. regulators to order eight recalls of Cybertrucks since its introduction, culminating in the March 2025 recall of almost every Cybertruck to correct the tendency of a stainless steel exterior panel to come off the vehicle at freeway speeds, posing a hazard to other drivers.

Advertisement

Online reports and videos showing Cybertrucks defeated by conditions such as uneven terrain and steep grades that are routinely managed by rival pickups may also have sapped buyer enthusiasm for the model.

It’s true that the Cybertruck has problems that aren’t shared with other EVs. One is that it can’t be sold in European Union countries, because the EU has found that its exterior design can imperil pedestrians.

Nor do other EV manufacturers have to contend with public obloquy being showered on their leaders; Tesla sales in Germany cratered last year after Musk threw his support behind the extreme-right neo-Nazi party Alternative for Germany. There, new Tesla vehicle registrations fell by 76.3% in February 2025 from the same month a year earlier — that is, to 1,429 from 6,029. The decline continued all year, resulting in an overall decline of 48.4%.

As my colleague Caroline Petrow-Cohen reported last year, public distemper over Musk’s position as the leader of DOGE, the quasi-governmental body that ran roughshod through the federal workforce after Donald Trump launched his second term, also may have cut into Tesla sales in the U.S. A study by Yale researchers last year estimated that Musk cost Tesla as many as 1.26 million car sales since October 2022, when he acquired the social media platform Twitter and gave greater access on it to the far right and other extremist voices.

That said, Teslas remained the best-selling EVs in the U.S. market last year with nearly 60% of EV unit sales, according to Cox. Its full-year decline of 7% was exceeded by several other carmakers with EVs in their lineups, including BMW (down 16.7%), Kia (down 39.7%) and Ford (down 14.1%).

Advertisement

The U.S. EV market generally lost ground after the expiration of federal incentives last year, but many individual models slumped sharply, including Ford’s all-electric version of its top-selling F-150 pickup, sales of which fell 18.5% from the year before (though it still outsold the Cybertruck).

Tesla’s transfers of Cybertrucks to other Musk operations should concern Tesla shareholders, depending on how much, if anything, SpaceX and the other companies paid for the vehicles. In arm’s-length transactions between related parties, the transfers should be marked at prices resembling those on the open market, whether individual or fleet sales.

Tesla has been vague to the point of opacity about these deals. In an amendment to its annual report filed on April 30 (after the Bloomberg report), it disclosed that it received about $143.3 million last year and $100,000 this year in deals with SpaceX, including “the sale of vehicles” at what may be market prices. But it didn’t say those deals involved the Cybertruck.

It would be interesting to know how SpaceX is using its Cybertrucks, since it wouldn’t seem to need a fleet to transport equipment headed for space in the back of pickup trucks. Why Musk’s AI or neurological companies need any such vehicles is hard to gauge.

As it happens, however, Tesla investors don’t seem to have been fazed by Bloomberg’s report. Tesla shares closed in Monday’s trading at $392.51, higher than they were on April 15, the day before Bloomberg published, when they closed at $391.95.

Advertisement

This wouldn’t be the first time that Musk has melded his personal interests with those of his public shareholders. The prototypical such action occurred in 2016, when he orchestrated Tesla’s purchase of his SolarCity for $2.8 billion, a 35% premium from the latter’s trading price. (Investment manager Jim Chanos, who had short positions in both companies, called the deal a “shameful example of corporate governance at its worst.”)

At the time, Tesla’s seven board seats were held by Musk and four of his cronies, including his brother Kimbal, and SolarCity’s board included Musk and two of his cousins. On that occasion, Tesla investors turned queasy, pushing Tesla shares down by more than 10% the day the deal was announced.

Musk defended the deal as a triumph of clean energy industry synergy, but one struggles to find significant gains from the linkup. Energy generation and storage, which would cover SolarCity’s business, accounted for about 13.5% of Tesla’s revenue in 2025, nearly a decade after the merger.

What role the Cybertruck — indeed, any Tesla vehicles — will play in the company’s future remains murky. Musk recently has talked about shifting the company’s focus to AI, robotaxis and humanoid robots, but these all resemble pipe dreams. AI is more and more a marketing term with less meat on its bones than the incessant publicity about it suggests and Tesla’s robotaxi venture today consists of about a dozen vehicles tooling around Austin, Texas, with human supervisors in the car or near at hand.

Musk last year projected that humanoid robots would generate “$30 trillion in revenue” for Tesla, though he acknowledged that he was “just guessing” and that there would be a “long way to go between here and making one billion robots a year.” As I’ve reported, however, even some robotics experts argue that giving workaday robots humanoid features makes no sense functionally and is likely to be abandoned once manufacturers seriously contemplate how household robots should look and function.

Advertisement

None of this means that Tesla might not be able to recapture its mojo in the EV market. Consumer interest in EVs tends to rise and fall in lockstep with gas prices. EV makers had a tough 2025 in the U.S. But that could turn around this year if President Trump’s Iran adventure continues to drive up the cost of oil and consequently gasoline prices at the pump.

But Tesla faces a lot more competition for EVs than it ever has in the past; other companies such as Hyundai have moved down-market and China’s BYD recently surpassed Tesla in global sales of battery-powered vehicles. BYD has been largely kept out of the U.S. market by high tariffs, but it may be impossible to keep its cars out forever. Tesla, which pioneered the EV market, may need a new model to compete with BYD and the foreign and domestic automakers already in the market, but the Cybertruck sure hasn’t been looking like its savior.

Continue Reading

Business

Anthropic and Wall Street Giants Join Forces to Create New A.I. Firm

Published

on

Anthropic and Wall Street Giants Join Forces to Create New A.I. Firm

Anthropic is teaming up with several large investment firms to create a venture that will help companies integrate artificial intelligence tools into their systems, the latest example of the deepening ties between Wall Street and the A.I. industry.

The private equity firms Blackstone and Hellman & Friedman and the investment bank Goldman Sachs through its investment funds are among the financial backers in the new firm, which will work with companies to deploy Anthropic’s A.I. model Claude.

In announcing the creation of the firm on Monday, Anthropic and the investment firms said the technology around A.I. was changing so rapidly that many companies were finding it challenging to integrate Claude.

The backers of the new firm said it would work with Anthropic’s engineers to help companies deploy Claude, which has abilities that “change on a monthly or even weekly basis.”

The creation of a firm combining Wall Street and Anthropic comes as the A.I. industry is locked in a fierce competition to become the go-to A.I. model in the private and public sector. It is also happening as A.I. companies, including Anthropic and its rival OpenAI, are expected to soon go public in what could be the largest series of public stock offerings ever, creating a boon for Wall Street.

Advertisement

The decision by Blackstone, Goldman and the other investment firms to partner with Anthropic is a notable endorsement of an A.I. company that the Trump administration has criticized for refusing to allow the Pentagon to deploy its models without meeting the company’s ethical limits.

Anthropic and the Pentagon are in federal litigation over the Defense Department’s decision to label the company a supply chain risk, an unusual use of the government’s power to raise concerns about how corporations build their products.

Many of the details of Anthropic’s venture with Wall Street have not yet been announced, including its name and chief executive. But one area that the venture said it would start working on is integrating Claude at portfolio companies of the private equity firms that backed this deal, including Blackstone and Hellman & Friedman.

Anthropic, Blackstone and Hellman & Friedman said they would each put $300 million into the new company, and Goldman Sachs would contribute roughly $150 million, according to two people familiar with the deal terms. General Atlantic, Leonard Green, Apollo Global Management, GIC and Sequoia Capital are among the other firms that are taking part and investing in the venture.

Wall Street banks have been among A.I.’s enthusiastic corporate users. During the first quarter earnings reports from the largest banks, some executives discussed with unusual candor how A.I. had automated certain jobs, which in turn led to job cuts and higher profits.

Advertisement

Elon Musk recently demanded that banks, law firms, auditors and other advisers working on the I.P.O. of his company, SpaceX, to buy subscriptions to his A.I. chatbot, Grok.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending