25 ms·

Given the letter written by the board, I think it's fair to discuss. At the very least, the board is trying to save face by blaming the shutdown on "the union b

Given the letter written by the board, I think it's fair to discuss. At the very least, the board is trying to save face by blaming the shutdown on "the union being unreasonable". That always makes me suspicious about the details being left out. The nuances around went it died are also important. Could it have been saved with a different managerial approach? That's especially relevant for a cultural institution.

bell-cot 4y ago
Call me old and cynical...but my read of the letter was "We are financially dead & headed to the Chapter 7 chop shop". Followed by all the required-by-social-conventions things they're supposed to say, regardless of truth. From skimming a couple sources, it sounds like the Symphony had profound financial problems, going back decades. Prospective local donors & sponsors tend to have long memories of such things. A little local non-profit can't play corporate name games to escape from a bad reputation. Nor count on attracting the best of board members or managers. I agree that the nuances, details, "could it have been saved?", local cultural institutions, etc. are important. But unless some long-term insider from the SAS pops up here on HN, I don't think we've any chance to find out. :(