Once we're all vaccinated...

[MissEllaWater]

...or most of us are anyway, do you think that self isolating/track and trace/all that jazz will still be a thing? And fines and so on if you don't comply? I'm not talking about in the next few months, more like in a year or two when it's all bedded in. Surely if the most vulnerable can be protected, we won't need to be quite so vigilant, inasmuch as we won't have to SI for ages if we've been in contact with a positive case?

It is sad for theatre and the performing arts, as often their demographic is older people, and there will be reluctance to come and pack out the venues.

Why would that happen if they have been vaccinated?

Yes, I of course know that no vaccine offers 100% protection, but once the most vulnerable have been vaccinated the risk is pretty small. Flu vaccines are pretty hit and miss, but older people don't live their lives in fear of catching it.

@IcedPurple

It is sad for theatre and the performing arts, as often their demographic is older people, and there will be reluctance to come and pack out the venues.

Why would that happen if they have been vaccinated?

Yes, I of course know that no vaccine offers 100% protection, but once the most vulnerable have been vaccinated the risk is pretty small. Flu vaccines are pretty hit and miss, but older people don't live their lives in fear of catching it.

Completely agree. Also even if you catch a virus you’ve been vaccinated against it’s usually much milder. I know once my parents have been vaccinated and the time has passed for immunity to kick in they’ll be back to normal ASAP. They’re in their 70s and want to make the most of their health and remaining years.

It is sad for theatre and the performing arts, as often their demographic is older people, and there will be reluctance to come and pack out the venues

Anecdotal I accept but every older person I know seems desperate to be out and about. Just before lockdown I popped into our local M & S & was amused to see the cafe rammed with not exactly social distancing OAPs. And our local rates were pretty high and well known to be pretty high. IME there's an awful lot of "Well I only have so many years left & I'm going to die of something eventually".

Restaurants, pubs, theatres etc need a certain number of bums on seats to be viable. Continued SD would mean most will simply go out of business, with the loss of millions of jobs. If there really is this great demand to be spaced out from your fellow human beings, then those who want this will have to pay extra for the privilege, because such a model simply isn't profitable for most businesses

This. I feel like there's a weird obliviousness to economic & social reality in these discussions. Huge swathes of our economic, social & cultural life just aren't compatible with SDing. People who want to continue to SD will very much need to do that on their own time / at their own expense....which is fine for them if they can afford it.

Apologies if t's been asked already, but what do you think will happen with pregnant women in the next while, if a lot of people have been vaccinated so things gets back to normal, but pregnant women will not be done along with children, will they be shielded until they give birth?

Well, the thing about vaccines is we don't know how long they will last, they may well wear off (then you wouldn't be protected), they may not be 100% anyhow and so on.

I got really ill after going to the panto one year and getting flu. I had been immunized. I enjoyed Craig Revell Horwood's performance but on balance it wasn't worth it!

So I might well sign up to the National Theatre subscription scheme and not go in person (CEV). I have young kids and really don't want to be ill.

Other people might of course make different choices, it depends what floats your boat. But younger people, who are less at risk, are not the core audience, for say the National Theatre, unless things have changed a lot recently.

The other thing is that they need full venues to break even, and putting gaps in, which is happening at the moment, will screw the profit margins.

Mind you, it would be possible to modify theatre design, with tailored ventilation and carefully amgled perspex screens?

This. I feel like there's a weird obliviousness to economic & social reality in these discussions. Huge swathes of our economic, social & cultural life just aren't compatible with SDing. People who want to continue to SD will very much need to do that on their own time / at their own expense....which is fine for them if they can afford it.

I feel that there's almost a competitive misanthropy in MN. People are very keen to tell you how they love WFH away from all the loudmouths in the office, how happy they are at not 'having' to socialise at Christmas and now, how they want to be separated from their fellow human being in restaurants, theatres etc. They're using Covid as an excuse for this, but businesses simply can't afford to cater to them. And why should they?

From the start of lockdown in March, there has been some loud voices who prefer life like this- but they have serious FOMO so have enjoyed not doing things while not feeling jealous about others doing them.

I do think the people who did fuck all in their free time before, who were happy to do fuck all in lockdown, will continue to do fuck all after a vaccine, just be terribly judgemental of others until covid has completely gone that people are daring to enjoy themselves.

All the older people who had busy lives before March I know are so looking forward to the vaccine as they see it as a way to get back to normal fast. Those who are reluctant are those who didn't really fill theatres or restaurants before.

Well, I'm very happy to support the National Theatre, but I am going to be cautious about infection risk. (so that probably means a subscription)

I think that people will make choices for themselves based on their perception of risk and what erm sparks joy for them.

I think that businesses need to be guided by what their customers are willing to buy, and the ones that don't get it right, sadly, will fold.

Also, a lot of restaurant chains were hanging in there by their fingernails, even before the virus. This will have affected their reserve capital a lot.

There will, on the one hand, be some people desperate to get back out there and have a social life and, on the other hand, people who can't because they have a lower disposable income now or are cautious about the virus.

I think it will be a challenge, frankly.

I've had a lot of my family work in catering, and it was seen as an area in which there would always be work. Less so, unfortunately, in a pandemic. I only wish them all well.

they're using Covid as an excuse for this, but businesses simply can't afford to cater to them. And why should they?

I don't understand what you mean by this? Or Iced Purples post.

If people aren't going to theatres because they don't want to be in crowds, how is that decision costing them more money? I get the wider economic argument about unemployment, but they aren't "asking businesses to cater for them" are they if they stay away

I do agree that many people have enjoyed having a reason excuse not to socialise as much and will extend that into their choices going forwards, according to their own priorities. This isn't going to cost them more money though is it - probably far less!

If people aren't going to theatres because they don't want to be in crowds, how is that decision costing them more money? I get the wider economic argument about unemployment, but they aren't "asking businesses to cater for them" are they if they stay away

If you read the post I was originally responding to, the person said that they believed that new regulations should be put in place requiring venues to host fewer people, and that this is a good thing because she considered in unpleasant to be around so many of her fellow human beings. Problem is, this won't be financially viable for the vast majority of businesses so isn't going to happen. If there really is a big demand for such venues, those interested will need to pay for the privilege, because most places simply cannot afford to do business in a 'socially distanced' manner.

Thanks Iced Purple - it's not always clear on a fast moving thread.

Totally agree. I absolutely cannot wait to get back to travelling and will happily take my chances on a plane (masked up etc) If someone wanted to be 2 metres away from others, I think they should have to pay for three (or however many it would require) seats.

In theatres, I enjoy going, but just don't feel it's a risk I would take going forwards. I guess I am thinking about how to offset the risk of my travelling and going to restaurants by limiting theatres, busy shops. I know others will be making similar decisions but hopefully their priorities will be different to mine and they will choose theatres and shops, so that overall, all business streams survive.

@IcedPurple

If people aren't going to theatres because they don't want to be in crowds, how is that decision costing them more money? I get the wider economic argument about unemployment, but they aren't "asking businesses to cater for them" are they if they stay away

If you read the post I was originally responding to, the person said that they believed that new regulations should be put in place requiring venues to host fewer people, and that this is a good thing because she considered in unpleasant to be around so many of her fellow human beings. Problem is, this won't be financially viable for the vast majority of businesses so isn't going to happen. If there really is a big demand for such venues, those interested will need to pay for the privilege, because most places simply cannot afford to do business in a 'socially distanced' manner.

??? was that meant to be to me?

I didn't say that at all!

I am CEV and while I have been a keen theatre goer for many years (and at one point was taking my small kids to theatre and arts shows on a monthly basis) I can't do that any more because it's too risky for me. Happy to support them in other ways if I can.

I don't think regulations should force venues to host fewer people. But theatres will need to look at what their audiences will be willing to attend with respect to risk, in order to get bums on seats as best they can.

I don't think it's unpleasant to be around lots of people, normally the opposite, but again, it might not be a good idea, for me, for the immediate future.

If businesses can't get people to buy their products they won't stay in business, end of, so they need to gauge what the market will tolerate.

If I don't go to the theatre, then I'll just do other stuff with the kids.

If this wasn't a reply to me, I apologise. If it was a reply to me, it didn't understand my posts.

??? hmm was that meant to be to me?

No.

I don't think regulations should force venues to host fewer people. But theatres will need to look at what their audiences will be willing to attend with respect to risk, in order to get bums on seats as best they can.

But theatres, cinemas, restaurants etc need to operate at full capacity to turn a profit. Many are struggling even with that. If sufficient numbers of potential patrons demand some form of social distancing in the future - which I doubt, but I guess we'll see - then they'll either have to pay extra for the privilege or the venues will go out of business. Because they are businesses, not public services.

@cretelover

Apologies if t's been asked already, but what do you think will happen with pregnant women in the next while, if a lot of people have been vaccinated so things gets back to normal, but pregnant women will not be done along with children, will they be shielded until they give birth?

Pregnant women aren't currently shielded

Not in the UK, but once the clinically vulnerable and over 50s have had the jab, I'd be off to the pub, and anyone telling me to Stay At Home can do one, frankly.

By the way, "antibodies" =/= "immunity".

T cells are very important with this virus, as they were with SARS. People infected with SARS back in 2003 still have strong immunity 17 years later.

I think isolating with symptoms will always be a thing. And so it should be. But should also be coupled with proper sick pay.

You cannot compare COVID to a cold or the norovirus.

I am pretty sure immuno compromised people do die of things like norovirus, actually.

@cretelover

Apologies if t's been asked already, but what do you think will happen with pregnant women in the next while, if a lot of people have been vaccinated so things gets back to normal, but pregnant women will not be done along with children, will they be shielded until they give birth?

They aren’t shielded now, just in the cv group for precaution, so no I doubt they will be shielded. It will be up to them, like everyone else, if they feel they want to stay away from people they can but won’t be supported by government. Particularly as when restrictions are relaxed Everyone pregnant will have done so knowing there was a pandemic.

I am aware that pregnant women aren't currently shielded. If they aren't vaccinating children ( as they get it mildly) surely it will run rampant through schools and those in contact with children will be at risk.

@cretelover

I am aware that pregnant women aren't currently shielded. If they aren't vaccinating children ( as they get it mildly) surely it will run rampant through schools and those in contact with children will be at risk.

Most of those in contact with children will have the opportunity to be vaccinated within a few months.