Memory serving, he got the boot last night (thank god! He and the poor little rich kid that wasted $50k on a 90-second preliminary audition and then had a bootleg of Harrary's "Janet Box" suffer technical problems. . . a prop that retails for over $20,000.00 normally, not working because it was made by a hack (I'm assuming, given the lack of deceptive style I'm used to seeing in the thing). . . but hey, who cares about quality in magic? AGT loves magicians in their show for one reason; they want to see them fail. Kevin James is still viewed as the "BEST" and most original magic act they've ever had on the show. He didn't go to the finals because the producers of the show want too much in way of salary cut, when they give you the big win and promote you for a year or two. Kevin had been around the biz way too long to put up with such games and wasn't nearly that desperate. . . which tends to be true for most; AGT was a quick PR visit that got them gigs and that was good enough. The old dude with the Cat. . . well, he flashes like a mad-man (I'm not a card guy and I can palm better) and too, he's trying to do Close-up Magic on a very big stage. . . worse, he's trying to stick with card tricks rather than stepping up to the plate and delivering something that fits the venue as well as expectations. When it comes to the line above "but it takes some serious guts to nut up and shut up and actually perform infront of that many people.? I couldn't help but chuckle; it's typically far harder (psychologically) to work for a dozen or less people regardless the kind of magic you may do (or any talent actually) simply because you don't have the numbers working to your favor; the more people, the "bigger" the reactions sound and of course, having 500 or more people gasping when you separate the two halves of the sawing cabinet is the sort of thing that punctuates the magic, something you cannot get when there's only 10 people in the room. . . trust me, I've had to endure such settings (anyone that's worked this stuff full-time knows said angst). Audience size should only be a consideration when it directly affects the style and type of performance you offer; the shows I offer now days would not work well for groups much more than 18 in size, because they were deliberately designed to cater to small audiences (I know of no seance that you'd do for 1,500 or more people that would be believable in today's world). The only other thing to be concerned with when it comes to audience size, is when it comes to depending on your percentage on the ticket take and how that compares to your operations nut.