
Prepared for Bumps, the Met Starts Charging Non-New Yorkers - kevinyen
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/arts/design/metropolitan-museum-of-art-starts-charging-non-new-yorkers.html
======
JBReefer
There is a lot to be said about seeing great art in a less crowded context.
One of the best days of my life was when I went to Member Only Hours at MoMA,
and I walked alone, in silence.

I live near the Met, and too many tour buses show up, discharge huge groups of
people who hustle and shove from one famous piece to the other - ignoring the
art that isn't in text books. It's not a checklist, it's a really incredible
place. All people should be entitled to see "Self Portrait with Straw Hat" but
man, maybe they should look at the pieces next to in, instead of running
downstairs to check off the next box.

In my opinion, this will be a good thing - fundamentally, the land belongs to
the people of the city of New York, and the free rent for that much acreage of
Central Park on Fifth Avenue is an incalculable subsidy. It should at least
_try_ to be more pleasant for the citizens of the city.

~~~
rhombocombus
My first time at the Louvre, I was enjoying a relatively quiet stroll through
the less crowded galleries after enjoying a thoroughly european vacation for
about a week. It was only when I happened into a very busy gallery with a
quickly moving throng of people. My reverie was shattered when I heard over my
shoulder in a thick southern US drawl "Man, lets just go see the Mona Lisa and
get the f __* outta here. " It was really the least impactful portion of our
visit because of the throngs of people.

~~~
HorizonXP
I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. I first went to Paris in 2014, and I
experienced the same thing. Throngs of people surrounding the Mona Lisa. I was
with family that wasn't very receptive to the Louvre experience, so we pretty
much "saw the Mona Lisa and got the f* out".

I'm heading back to Paris next month with just my wife, and I plan on spending
at least 2 days in the Louvre. I wouldn't say that people ruin art, but what I
saw with the Mona Lisa was not very positive.

~~~
filereaper
The opposite of that can be equally irritating.

Take for instance the Galleria Borghese in Rome which only allows 500 visitors
in pre-determined slots. If you miss your slot or everything is filled out
during your trip, you'll miss out like we did.

What I haven't figured out is why museums like the Louvre need to close for
the night, its art work. Why not leave it open all night long and shutdown for
a few days for maintenance work.

[1] [http://www.galleriaborghese.it/en/](http://www.galleriaborghese.it/en/)

~~~
ghaff
I expect for the same reason most stores close down at night. Sure, you'll get
some business but probably not enough to cover the costs of staying open.
Furthermore, there's probably a lot of daily maintenance and cleaning to do.

------
andrewla
From looking at articles around this, the data looks like this:

    
    
        Museum budget          $  305M
        Admissions(current)    $   43M
        City Energy Subsidy    $   15M
        City General Subsidy   $   11M
    
        Expected windfall      $   ~6M
        City General Subsidy   $    8M
    

The new subsidy will apparently decline on a sliding scale as the admissions
income increases, to a minimum of $8M from the current subsidy of $11M.

So the gain here is very small -- ~1% of the operating budget, but this is
clearly a "foot-in-the-door" move.

------
beezle
25 bucks is pretty rich for just kicking around in a museum for a little
while. Understand they need more funding but think they would do better with a
lower price that doesn't result in turn aways (or never shows). And certainly
taking a $20 out of your wallet just hurts less psychologically than having to
fish out another bill as well.

~~~
drb91
"The Met" isn't just any old museum, it's a main reason to visit new york. I'd
pay $100 for an entire day there (or three days, as it is now!). You simply
can't see that quality of museum in many parts of the country, let alone the
world.

~~~
greglindahl
In the past, they would happily have taken your $100 donation. I suspect
that's still true.

~~~
drb91
Sure! Not my point though--just scoffing at the idea that $25 is at all too
high for the experience.

I would also strongly support a sliding scale, though how that would work I
have no idea.

~~~
greglindahl
They had a sliding scale already.

------
JeanMarcS
This is a great museum, and the price is not that high.

My family and I were in NYC in December. We visited the American Museum of
Natural History, which have the same policy of "pay what you want".

We were there at the opening, because, as the Met, it's a pretty big museum
and you (really) need the day if you want to make a full tour of it.

We then had 2 solutions. Waiting who know how long behind around 30-40 persons
to have tickets, or go to the paying kiosk.

Well, in that paying kiosk, you cannot "pay as you want". But I still choosed
to pay full price instead of waisting my time in a line with my 7yo kids.

We went on the Met on our last day in NYC, purely randomly. And, of course, I
was happy not to pay a hundred bucks for the 4 of us (admitting that it's also
the price for kids ?).

But due to the quality of the exhibitions, it's a normal price. Perhaps 20$
might have been better.

Disclaimer : I'm not american, so I don't know the "normal" policy for museum
entrance. Here in France, you usually have to pay for museum, except a few
days per years. For example, the Louvre museum in Paris is around 20$.

~~~
ghaff
$25 is on the higher side for admissions in the US but, as others have noted,
the Met is both huge and outstanding. $10-$20 is probably the more common
museum admission range. [ADDED: NYC is probably higher in general than in
other cities.]

------
bradleyjg
I don't have a problem with the general concept. Tourists spend a lot of money
coming to visit NYC in no small part because of attractions like the Met. Why
should the airlines, hotels, restaurants, bars and so on get some of that but
not the actual attraction itself?

That said, as I understand significant mismanagement and scope creep have lead
to the financial shortfall that inspired this pricing change. I worry that in
signing off on this change the city has rewarded misfeasiance.

~~~
ardit33
The Met was build on a city property/building, and since the 1870 its mission
has been to provide art and culture free of charge.

Should the Met charge us residents but out of state visitors? eg. people that
just live across Hudson (NJ)? How about, lets say the visiting parents of
somebody that lives in NYC? How about people that lived here and moved away at
some point.

On the other hand, the Met has no alliance for the random foreign tourists
that come and visit, so charging them is an easy case.

~~~
bradleyjg
Frankly, I’m still salty that the commuter tax was done away with by the
corrupt Sheldon Silver. If the only thing that NJites have pay for is the Met
they are getting off very easy. A similar argument can be made for the rest of
the country, given our balance of payments with Washington.

The lifelong NYer that moved to Florida last year is a decent point, but it’s
also a rather small edge case.

------
fredophile
I've visited this museum on past trips to New York but will now be less likely
to do so. In the past I've gone in, paid $5-10 and spent 1-3 hours at the
museum before moving on. It's a really big museum so I'd do this multiple
times in a trip. Paying $25 I'd feel like I have to put everything I want to
see into a single, longer visit. That's a lot less interesting to me than
breaking it into several smaller visits over a few days.

~~~
aeling
The $25 admission gets you in for 3 consecutive days, which seems like it
should still (mostly) support your way of using the museum?

~~~
mortenjorck
This is an under-communicated point, and both makes the admission more
palatable while subtly increasing the sense of value through the implication
that you'll need multiple days to actually take in the breadth of the
institution's collections.

------
kolchinski
I noticed this from the article: The proportion of museumgoers who pay a
“suggested” amount has declined from 63 percent to 17 percent over the last 13
years...

Which made me think of something else I've encountered, which is that the
percentage of people who respond to phone polls has plummeted over a similar
time frame - [http://www.pewresearch.org/2017/05/15/what-low-response-
rate...](http://www.pewresearch.org/2017/05/15/what-low-response-rates-mean-
for-telephone-surveys/)

I wonder if these trends are related symptoms of a cultural change away from
community-mindedness, and if so, has anyone seen other numbers in the same
vein?

~~~
paxy
I think it's because more casual and lower income demographics have started
visiting museums in that time period.

~~~
user5994461
The disposable income went down for the vast majority of the population. Don't
look further.

------
nerfhammer
And they stopped doing the metal buttons as proof of purchase! Which was a
minor souvenir in itself and also could be picked up off the stairs/sidewalk
out front

------
ghaff
The "voluntary" admission never felt all that voluntary to me. Sure. You could
say no when you got to the cashier. But it always felt to me at least that
there was a strong vibe of you really ought to pay this amount unless you
really can't afford to.

It's certainly a different character from the museums in London, for example,
that just have their big donation buckets.

With the Met, this actually more honest than it was before.

~~~
goldenkey
That sort of is the point though. People shouldn't feel great about being
cheapskates.

------
DoofusOfDeath
So IIUC, they're charging people differently based on their nationality (in
the sense the people from outside the U.S. cannot get the discount).

Is such discrimitory pricing legal?

~~~
a_t48
Yes. There are a bunch of places in SF that give discounts if you are a local.

~~~
DoofusOfDeath
I'm not sure if that's the same as it being legal. I'd be curious to know of
any case law on the matter.

------
jacques_chester
Here's how I see it: I pay city taxes all year round, visitors don't. The
policy is fair.

------
ggg9990
No problem with this, but then art donations to the museum should not be
federally tax deductible. Donations should be tax deductible only if they
benefit the entire tax base — if the Met only offers free admission to New
Yorkers, billionaires should only be able to deduct their New York taxes when
they donate Michelangelos.

~~~
ghaff
There is absolutely no requirement that tax exempt organizations can't charge
admission fees, membership fees, etc.

~~~
ggg9990
There isn’t now, but there should be.

