It was extensively adapted for American audiences, with an English translation, and more comedy.Changes were still being made as it went through its unusually long stretch of 61 previews. "This is simply a bad show that doesn't seem to know what it wants to be," one critic said. "Sad to say, The Phantom of the Opera star as Count von Krolock (rhyme that with schlock) is not so much a shadow of his glamorous former self, as a puffed-up cartoon. The only horror is that so much money and talent has been thrown at this project."The closure is a blow to Crawford, who has translated his success in Phantom into a high-rolling career in America, dotted with awards and multi-million-dollar earnings. He made a string of successful albums and moved to Las Vegas.Crawford recently denied reports he was paid $180,000 (£112,000) a week, and vowed to make the show work "I'm excited but I'm also very nervous. If you want to be brave and adventurous, you've got to go out there If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. But I will be trying my hardest, as will everyone else."Other New York DisastersThe biggest recent British failure on Broadway was Chess Tim Rice's collaboration with the Abba songwriters, Bjorn Ulvaeus and Benny Anderson.

It closed after 68 performances at the Imperial Theatre in 1988, losing $6m (£3.7m).Andrew Lloyd Webber's Aspects of Love closed after 377 performances in 1991, despite $14m in advance bookings.Sir Ian McKellen's time at the Virginia Theatre failed to provide the "feeling of success" he had hoped for from Broadway. Wild Honey, by Chekhov, in which he starred, lasted 28 performances in 1987.. The Theatre world –and the capital's politicians – have finally accepted that they have to offer cheaper tickets if they are to get new audiences, particularly young audiences, to go to the theatre. The Theatre world –and the capital's politicians – have finally accepted that they have to offer cheaper tickets if they are to get new audiences, particularly young audiences, to go to the theatre. Theatre owners and producers over the years have blamed everything for the visible lack of younger audiences: dearth of good new writing; the shape of the auditoriums; the ban on bringing drinks inside. Lately they have found new excuses: the state of London's streets, squalor, drunks, beggars, drug addicts and transport problems.Convenient excuses but they do not chime with the correspondence I have had from theatre-goers who instead blame high prices, and poor views and facilities inside the theatres, and – a particular irritation – booking fees.While theatre owners and producers are silent over booking fees – often charged not per transaction but per ticket – they are at last acknowledging that lower prices will bring in a new audience.My own campaign, the Lister Experiment, urged producers to harness the vast film-going audience by charging cinema prices for selected performances once a week.

Any short-term losses would, I suggested, be more than remedied over time by attracting a new audience.The response was extremely good, with several producers charging £11.50, the price of a central London cinema ticket, for best seats and attracting many new theatre-goers. More than 1,000 people booked tickets this way for one performance of the Queen musical We Will Rock You.The Lister Experiment continues, but yesterday a separate initiative showed that the quest for cheaper tickets is gaining ground. Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, announced that, with the Society of London Theatre, he is putting £350,000 into a two-month, mass discounting scheme. Subject to availability, 75,000 tickets for West End shows will be on offer, at cheap prices, ranging from £10 to £20. For those under 25 or over 65, some performances will be as cheap as £5.Mr Livingstone said: "People travel thousands of miles to enjoy our theatre productions. But not all Londoners are making the most of what is on their doorstep, in particular young people.