Cher Public

  • Batty Masetto: L’armerjacqu ino si è traviato nelle oscurità della lingua italiana, ma per fortuna ha ritrovato il senso giusto.... 9:55 PM
  • Evenhanded: Well. +1! 7:52 PM
  • Poison Ivy: For those who like Oropesa, she has her own youtube channel. This is her latest newsletter: httpv://www.youtub 7:51 PM
  • armerjacquino: WAIT: I’m talking second-degree nonsense about ‘trivial one’. It’s just struck me that... 7:19 PM
  • armerjacquino: The title is kind of untranslatable- it means ‘the trivial one’ or something similar, so it suggests that... 7:16 PM
  • Rowna: I am very happy that Mr. Innaurato penned such a detailed account of Ms. Oropesa’s Violetta.So often when others write about... 6:53 PM
  • laddie: +1 6:40 PM
  • Signor Bruschino: I’m still curious if this great La Cieca blind item from 2014 is about Oropesa??? http://parterre... 6:17 PM

RIP Brad Wilber’s “Met Futures” page

After 15 years of astoundingly accurate forecasts of future Met seasons, the invaluable resource by Brad Wilber has been, apparently, permanently expunged from the internet. Those of you who, like La Cieca, will cherish the last bits of wisdom from this site may want to download and save this PDF of the most recent cached version of the site before its extinction.


  • rysanekfreak says:

    Perhaps as part of each weekly Intermission Feature, our doyenne could include a little snippet called “Lois K tells us that the Met will….”

  • Arianna a Nasso says:

    Are there any lawyers here (or posters with partners/close friends who are) who can explain how this is not a free speech situation? If Brad were a Met employee who signed a confidentiality agreement, that would be one thing. The Met Futures can’t be considered libel (e.g.,Tom Cruise responding to the gay rumors), can it? If Watergate could be revealed in the press, why not the Met future plans?

    • ianw2 says:

      Did you really just compare Met Futures to Watergate?

    • atalaya says:

      If it got to the point where the Met decided to take legal action, Brad’s legal bill would be in the five figures almost immediately. Accordingly, it doesn’t really matter if what he’s doing is protected free speech. Even were he to win the court case he’d be out $20k+ in legal fees. That’s a lot of money to spend protecting a hobby that was done for the benefit of opera lovers and not to generate income.

      For those not in America, that’s our legal system. Even when you win, you lose.

    • Maria Malcontent says:

      Say what about Tom Cruise?

  • brooklynpunk says:

    I WILL miss the “Futures” page very much..BUT..playing “devil’s advocate, fer a sec..(.and because of my legal egg-head backround.). I found this site.. which does talk a bit about bloggers/”free-speech”/ and “company trade secrets” which is sort of interesting , and possibly illuminating to the current thread…

    ..of course… this is coming from a firm that is paid to protect Corporate interests…so…take it with a grain of salt…of. at least be aware of the side of the fence of the position(s) it is defending….

    • Maria Malcontent says:

      I suspect, and it’s purely a guess, that his real vulnerability was calling it “Met” futures. I find it hard to believe that publishing the rumors was a legal problem (which doesn’t mean he wasn’t threatened) because so many newspapers and magazines specialize in all kinds of gossip and prediction. But once you use the title of the ‘brand’, you may well be opening yourself up for some kind of action or claim and that may be where they ‘got’ him in the first place. All pure speculation. As I say the thing that seems to me irresponsible is that the MET has not made any comment about this happening. They obviously don’t have to -= and it seems pretty obvious Brad is restricted in what he can say = but one would think there had been a statement.

  • Noel Dahling says:

    Anybody else notice they’ve scheduled MORE Turandot’s with Ghuleghina?

  • Hippolyte says:

    I’ve had MET Futures bookmarked for years as it migrated from host to host and even corresponded with Brad a few times when I’ve had bits of information to contribute. It’s been emulated on sites throughout the world--I know of similar lists for the Paris Opera and other French houses, as well as for Spanish opera houses too--it’s just a commonplace on the internet these days.

    Brad’s always been gracious and enthusiastic and--as a New Yorker and someone who attends the MET often--I loved his site and followed it religiously. I will miss it greatly.

  • operagirl40 says:

    Re: the MET legal department…….FUCK THEM! If Mr. Wilbur wants to start a “Rumors are, that…..” blog, or occasionally salt and pepper THIS site with “Overheard, recently….” casting and repertoire statements, who’s to stop him? He’s not stating FACT … only what word “on the street” is. As much as I love the MET, the legal and PR departments, (and this is true of many other major opera-houses in this country) are made up of arrogant, self-important bastards!

    • m. croche says:

      This action by the MET does seem awfully petty. If the MET legal department really has nothing better to do than to intimidate a blogger with frivolous litigation, then I think we’ve identified an area of the MET’s budget where some money could be saved.

  • louannd says:

    Speaking of legal departments:

  • Maria Malcontent says:

    I have no idea, but it looks as if Brad were forced to throw in the towel unwillingly. That is how I ‘read’ his comment that he and the MET have been having discussions. We are having those discussions in Afghanistan right now, as far as I am concerned, but of course I could be wrong. I really regret that he is not going to be around. Not only was no harm done that I can see, but in a world in which J Lo is more important than the stock market, every bit of spicy interest helps. I don’t remember anything on the page that was defamatory. It’s the kind of thihg that people talk about all the time. In a lot of situations sadly, might makes right. If the MET had a good reason, then it was incumbent on them to say it; perhaps there is one -- although I can’t think of one -- but this to me is just Macht, and ultimately I think, a mistake.

  • parpignol says:

    we’re assuming the Met used threats; I suppose they might have tried inducements.

  • Maria Malcontent says:

    How could that be? Gheorghiu is still on the roster….