Lloyd Dorfman: Why is the man who introduced cheap theatre tickets such a hard act for others to follow?

My Week

If a businessperson were to be a model for others, whom would you choose? One, on what might be a very short list, would be Lloyd Dorfman. He is best known in commerce as the founder of Travelex, which grew from one bureau de change near the British Museum to become the world’s largest currency exchanging business. He still keeps a small stake, having sold the bulk of his shares. Dorfman has since gone on to found The Office Group, which provides flexible office units, and Doddle, the parcels service that makes collecting and returning online shopping easier. All three are terrific businesses that mark him out as a seriously clever entrepreneur, but it is his philanthropy that sets him apart.

Dorfman, 63, is chairman of The Prince’s Trust, the Prince of Wales’s charity for young people. He is also the person who set up the revolutionary scheme to fund cheaper seats at the National Theatre. The Travelex sponsorship deal sees the company make up the difference on seats sold for £15 that would normally cost a lot more. The National Theatre puts on four shows a year where 66 per cent of the tickets are £15 for any performance, without condition. So far, in the 12 years since it started, 1.3 million people have been able to see a play at the prestigious theatre at the lower price; many of those are first-time theatre-goers who could not otherwise afford to go.

I met Dorfman this week. He has not lost his drive, despite having made a fortune from Travelex (The Sunday Times Rich List reckons he’s worth £550m). He couldn’t imagine anything worse, he said, than retiring and playing golf. He quoted the US politician Claude Pepper, saying: “Life is like riding a bicycle: you don’t fall off unless you stop pedalling.”

He’d got so much going on, with The Office Group, Doddle, The Prince’s Trust and Travelex, where he acts as an ambassador, that the idea of putting his feet up was anathema. What genuinely puzzled him was why more of his peers did not do the same, why they did not also give back, in time and cash.

The National Theatre backing came about because he is a theatre-lover (he sits on the board of the National) and he got chatting to Nicholas Hytner, its then artistic director, about the venue pricing itself out of the reach of ordinary people. The result was the partnership with Travelex.

It was simple and clear, not rocket science. What is puzzling is why more theatres, opera houses and concert halls have not followed suit. It’s so obvious, yet the only one he could think of that had tried it was Sydney Opera House.

Bikes: the bane of builders’ lives

To a discreet, high-powered, property dinner in central London. Around the table were the heads of some of our major residential and commercial developers. The subject under discussion was how the capital will look in the decades ahead. It was fascinating, with talk of more bridges and fast train links. The population of London will have soared by then, and a key sticking point is where are all those people going to live?

There was not one commonly agreed solution to the lack of affordable housing. Among those mentioned were: the Government, local authorities and public bodies making better use of their existing land and properties; the Government stepping in and buying sites at market prices; and much improved transport to outlying areas where property is cheaper.

On one subject they were in unison: the car was once the bane of office developers’ lives, but now it’s the bike. Every project they ever did had to supply adequate car parking, often in the basement. It was expensive and had to be properly constructed. Now the pressure is to cater for cyclists. They need secure racks, ramps, and even pumps so they can blow up and repair their tyres, moaned one major property boss. Unlike car parks which were usually only the preserve of the high-ups, cycling is much more egalitarian. They have to assume that many more people in the building will ride bikes but they don’t know the exact number. It has become a nightmare, he complained.

Price wasn’t right for Osborne

If headhunters acting for a public service employer make you think you’ve got the job, put the champagne on hold, pending a formal announcement. Twice this week, candidates who were widely thought to be shoo-ins for top public posts lost out in favour of someone else. Mark Price stood down as chief executive of Waitrose because he was applying to be chairman of Channel 4. He was already the publicly owned broadcaster’s deputy chairman and it was widely thought that he would soon be stepping up to chairman. Alas, it was not to be. Charles Gurassa, who has previously chaired three media companies – Virgin Mobile, LoveFilm and Parthenon – now has a fourth to add to his collection. Price is popular, with a terrific track record at Waitrose.

I know Price, like him and shared his disappointment. What did for Price, though, was not his ability to manage but his lack of experience in buying and selling companies. What distinguished Gurassa’s application is that the three businesses he chaired were all sold while he was in charge.

That, plus Price’s affection for the Waitrose model – it’s part of John Lewis, which is owned by its employees – gave the nod to Gurassa. The City, it was felt, would prefer someone with Gurassa’s background. Channel 4’s days in public hands must be numbered: expect its privatisation.

Meanwhile, the same was happening with the Financial Conduct Authority. There was Greg Medcraft, head of Australia’s financial regulator, house-hunting in London and discussing relocation (including apparently, in Davos with Mark Carney, who moved here from Canada to run the Bank of England), believing that he was being made chief executive of our watchdog.

Then George Osborne declares that the new head of the FCA will be Andrew Bailey, the Bank of England’s deputy Governor. Osborne has form in this regard. I well remember meeting Paul Tucker, then a deputy Governor of the Bank, in 2013, before what was expected to be his crowning as Governor. There was no doubt, Tucker was confident of getting the job. What happened? The Chancellor sprang a surprise and chose Carney. Which begs the question: when Medcraft and Carney met in Davos and they discussed moving to London, did the latter counsel caution, or did he know Medcraft had not been picked and didn’t let on?