MoviePass: It's Back (Different tiers, use at any participating theaters)

[itsyoung!!]

Nah, no reserved seating and no Atmos? fukk it

its $10 a month...

 

[JordanWearinThe45]

What kind of movies are we talking about? shyt like Reindeer Games and Windtalkers rereleases or new shyt like Thanos going ham on Tony Starks?

Every ting

 

[R.E.N. Spells Ren]

Let's say the app grows to 50 million users (in comprison Netflix has 104)...that's $6 billion. Pretty damn good. But in 2014, Disney netted $1.7B off of $7.2B in revenue. I'm not a financial wizard but the sounds like their cost of operation was $5.5B. Even if it wasn't, that's the largest studio at a little more than a quarter of the market. So let's say Disney the other studios that make up the Big Six have production and operating costs of $20B...how is the subscription fee from Moviepass helping them cover all expenses?

Furthermore, Hollywood getting the bulk of the $120 from the average moviegoer doesn't make sense. That's the subscription to the app so how is that being pocketed by studios? Even if the subscription fee every year is gone towards buying the tickets it's not enough for every movie made by the major companies and the company that bought a chunk of Moviepass isn't gonna pour $10B+ annually.

Exposure doesn't really mean much if it's free and a higher backend (DVD/Blu-ray, TV syndication) would make sense if Netflix providing the same service didn't exist.

It makes sense for moviegoers because it's unprecedented convenience.
It can make sense for theatres, if everyone decides to spend $20 on concessions since they didn't pay for the ticket.
It might make sense for the 3rd party because I'm not seeing where the cash comes from to cover every major movie each month, but then again Netflix supposedly loses money/makes a slight profit compared to what they spend also ($187M in net income compared to $5B spent on original content in 2016).

But I'm not seeing how it makes sense for film studios unless info is out on 1) how many tickets the 3rd party purchases at theater price 2) how film studios are entitled to the lion's share of the 3rd party's subscription fee, and 3) if they are, how the subscription fee has the entire industry covered.

I do think it would help independent films since they aren't done with big ass overheads but for the big fish it's not adding up to me.

Breh, you're just confusing things by not looking at the average amount moviegoers pay. If only 50M people join the app, then the studios will continue to make money off of the rest of the population that choose to pay per movie. It's not like those that choose not to join In the subscription plan are just gonna stop going to movies.

In 2012, 225M people went to the theaters at least once in the US/Canada: http://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2012-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-Report.pdf


In 2012, those 225M people spent $10.8B....thats an average of $48/person in 2012. As long as the app is not strictly signing up people who spend way above the average, a $120/year plan should drive up the average spend amongst moviegoers which means Hollywood makes more money! Even if that average goes up too $60 that's a huge win for Hollywood.


(And I get that 2012 was five years ago, so the numbers aren't the same, but I'm just trying to illustrate the concept. The average moviegoer is not spending anywhere near $120/year even in 2017)

 

[GreenGrass]

all i want is some silence in the goddamn cinema :ineedmo:

thats one thing you will never get at the theaters
plus i hate the people who use their cell phones when its playing


let's face it, breh

we are too for this

 

[joeychizzle]

thats one thing you will never get at the theaters
plus i hate the people who use their cell phones when its playing


let's face it, breh

we are too for this

on the contrary cell phones ain't too bad for me cuz i'm always lookin up
i'm only 25 breh i'm far from too old :chillhov:
i just want 2 hours of stfu so I can enjoy cinematic excellence... or doodoo lol.

 

[Floyd Pinkerton]

i be going out to Bayonne to the flix
thats my go to spot when i dont feel like going in the city

i done threw mad slushies at kids in Manhattan!

Crossing bodies of water just to catch a flick though

 

[⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐]

shyt. i love going to the movies.
one of the few places i truly feel at peace.


im down!

 

[CobaltBlue]

No problem with that, just don't see the benefit from a business standpoint. of giving 50% of your movie revenue when you could get 100% of it and make movie chains pay you for the privilege of being able to show their content.

I feel ya but it's still a mutually beneficial situation to a degree. Major studios down to small independent filmmakers still want their movies on the big screen, initially. Mainly for the experience and it's still a viable means of distribution. It's still movies making their money back in first or second week.

 

[Dee_Roso]

They do this overseas already

 

[hayesc0]

I don't go to theaters often...but this might entice me to go more often

This is a great idea imo and it would make the theaters movie studios and actors more money generally.

 

[Electric Ladyland]

can you only see each movie one time though?

 

[Clark Wayne]

its $10 a month...

I see movies on Saturday mornings so it's already relatively cheap for me. A regular 2-D showing is $6.75 and a Dolby or IMAX/3-D is $11.75

Plus as far as I can tell there is no reserved seating unless you physically go near the theater yourself. So even being $10 I wouldn't get it.

 

[David_TheMan]

I feel ya but it's still a mutually beneficial situation to a degree. Major studios down to small independent filmmakers still want their movies on the big screen, initially. Mainly for the experience and it's still a viable means of distribution. It's still movies making their money back in first or second week.

I think the reason studios want movies at the theater is that to qualify for awards it has to be shown at the theaters and a certain number of theaters for a certain amount of days.
You get rid of that and I think you will see a massive transition to pure direct consumer distribution methods or a change in the theater game where content providers no longer have to pay for screens but the theaters pay them for content.

 

[nieman]

I go to the movies about 6x a year, and I'm a movie fanatic..simply because there's not much coming out that I be interested in. So I'd be burned $40. I'd pass. I also always go to the movies solo.

The model will have to accommodate groups in order for it to be viable. Families or pairs...but once again.

 

[CashmereThoughts]

The Only Downside Is The Large Quantity Of Idiots, Kids And Teenagers That Will Be There Acting Like a$$holes

I Dunno Where Y'all Live But In NY You Gotta Choose Your Theather, Movie, Day And Time You Go Wisely lol

Gotta fukk Around And Leave Your Borough

AMC 84th Street