4 ms·

Still waiting for the ability to purchase a new movie from home. Can't think of a single reason why it hasn't happened yet. Charge $50 if you want, people would

by Touche 9y ago

Still waiting for the ability to purchase a new movie from home. Can't think of a single reason why it hasn't happened yet. Charge $50 if you want, people would pay it. And it would probably actually recreate that water-cooler conversations that don't really happen all that often any more.

buckminster 9y ago
This is a thing. Only $35,000 and you can probably haggle. http://www.primacinema.com/ http://www.primacinema.com/
- Touche 9y ago
  That's wild. From the website it's not clear which movies are available though. Is it all of them, or does this company make arrangements with certain studios? Also, what's the cost per-movie once you've done the installation?
  - buckminster 9y ago
    The media coverage when they launched claimed they had all the latest movies, but I've no idea what the truth is.
rhino369 9y ago
>Can't think of a single reason why it hasn't happened yet. Piracy. Any home version of a movie would be ripped and put on warez in hours after release in 4k. I'd never go to the theater again. But CAMs and TS suck.
- Touche 9y ago
  Solid point. I'm really surprised this doesn't already happen. You could argue that this hasn't hurt on-demand services like iTunes and Amazon Video, where people could torrent the videos instead of buying/renting them. With piracy you're always going to lose some small number of customers, but if you make renting them legally easy, people will pay.
  - rhino369 9y ago
    They probably balance the cost of piracy vs. the additional sales. Sure VoD, streaming, and DVD/BR allows piracy, but it also creates many more sales. People are already paying $10-15 per person to see a movie in the theater. I'm sure some consultant concluded the new sales from pre-release home rentals won't cancel out lost ticket sales and piracy. They also have to worry about theaters, which are a key part of their busines model but aren't under studio control. If 50% of customers stop going to the movies because they rent at home, that might make theater unviable or make the theatres demand larger cuts of profits. And I also imagine they are worried about brand dilution. Movies and TV have never been more similar. TV might even have better overall quality now. But movies can charge 12 bucks for 2 hours and TV is having a hard time charging 12 bucks for unlimited everything. If Avengers 4 is available on your local TV, is it still a movie? Will people still want to pay 50 bucks to stream it? Or are they going to want to pay 3.99?
    - Touche 9y ago
      The more I think about it, I really doubt that piracy plays much into it because, like I said, that already happens with post-theater movies. You can offset the piracy damage by increasing the ticket price or by selling more tickets. I would imagine that you could do both. Having to go to a theater is a real blocker. These stats from 2014 said on average 3.7 tickets were sold per person, per year. https://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/MPAA-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-2014.pdf https://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/MPAA-Theatri... That means on any given weekend there's less than a 10% chance that someone will go to the theater. I would imagine having movies available at home would at least double that number. And since presumably people will watch these movies socially you could charge much more for them; $50 or $60 per movie doesn't sound unreasonable at all, that's assuming between 4-5 people are watching it together. I wouldn't be surprised if it could go even higher. Consider going to the theater where you're probably going to buy some food before (either at a restaurant or concessions, or both), with only 2 people you are coming close to, or exceeding, that $60 figure anyways.
    - Touche 9y ago
      As for the impact on theaters, I'm not sure why studios should care. They're just middle-men, right?

by Touche 9y ago

buckminster 9y ago

This is a thing. Only $35,000 and you can probably haggle. http://www.primacinema.com/ http://www.primacinema.com/

Touche 9y ago
That's wild. From the website it's not clear which movies are available though. Is it all of them, or does this company make arrangements with certain studios? Also, what's the cost per-movie once you've done the installation?
- buckminster 9y ago
  The media coverage when they launched claimed they had all the latest movies, but I've no idea what the truth is.

rhino369 9y ago

>Can't think of a single reason why it hasn't happened yet. Piracy. Any home version of a movie would be ripped and put on warez in hours after release in 4k. I'd never go to the theater again. But CAMs and TS suck.

Touche 9y ago
Solid point. I'm really surprised this doesn't already happen. You could argue that this hasn't hurt on-demand services like iTunes and Amazon Video, where people could torrent the videos instead of buying/renting them. With piracy you're always going to lose some small number of customers, but if you make renting them legally easy, people will pay.
- rhino369 9y ago
  They probably balance the cost of piracy vs. the additional sales. Sure VoD, streaming, and DVD/BR allows piracy, but it also creates many more sales. People are already paying $10-15 per person to see a movie in the theater. I'm sure some consultant concluded the new sales from pre-release home rentals won't cancel out lost ticket sales and piracy. They also have to worry about theaters, which are a key part of their busines model but aren't under studio control. If 50% of customers stop going to the movies because they rent at home, that might make theater unviable or make the theatres demand larger cuts of profits. And I also imagine they are worried about brand dilution. Movies and TV have never been more similar. TV might even have better overall quality now. But movies can charge 12 bucks for 2 hours and TV is having a hard time charging 12 bucks for unlimited everything. If Avengers 4 is available on your local TV, is it still a movie? Will people still want to pay 50 bucks to stream it? Or are they going to want to pay 3.99?
  - Touche 9y ago
    The more I think about it, I really doubt that piracy plays much into it because, like I said, that already happens with post-theater movies. You can offset the piracy damage by increasing the ticket price or by selling more tickets. I would imagine that you could do both. Having to go to a theater is a real blocker. These stats from 2014 said on average 3.7 tickets were sold per person, per year. https://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/MPAA-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-2014.pdf https://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/MPAA-Theatri... That means on any given weekend there's less than a 10% chance that someone will go to the theater. I would imagine having movies available at home would at least double that number. And since presumably people will watch these movies socially you could charge much more for them; $50 or $60 per movie doesn't sound unreasonable at all, that's assuming between 4-5 people are watching it together. I wouldn't be surprised if it could go even higher. Consider going to the theater where you're probably going to buy some food before (either at a restaurant or concessions, or both), with only 2 people you are coming close to, or exceeding, that $60 figure anyways.
  - Touche 9y ago
    As for the impact on theaters, I'm not sure why studios should care. They're just middle-men, right?