| Trust me. It's financial decisions.
Because the author implied that those people who would be able to pay would be not kids. Guess who takes kids to the circus? Parents. So why would this attract parents any more than regular circuses (or circi? lol)? One might say that these new circuses were more mature, but let's just think about how parents probably don't have as much money as other patrons without children. All in all, I would say that parents not only aren't all adults (as it was generalizing), but the wrong section of adults to be considering.
Now, the reason that its shrewd financial decisions is clear. The author consistently praised those decisions, and it can be noted that by reducing costs, the Cirque de Solei was able to gain more revenue by charging steeper rates to those people who could afford it
EDIT: It's cause and effect. Without getting rid of animals, they wouldn't have attracted adults, meaning no steep rates. The saving money was just an added bonus in the way of answering this question, but it made it impenetrably correct. |