3 ms·

Weird, it's almost like theaters were charging what they charge for actual reasons rather than "corporate greed".

by bena 8y ago

apocalyptic0n3 8y ago
Er... the actual cost of someone going to the theater is irrelevant here. The only cost that matters is what the theaters are charging since that is what MoviePass has to cover. If they can't cover that, they can't provide their service. It doesn't matter if the theater is charging $3 or $30 per ticket; if MoviePass cannot, at a bare minimum, cover that cost, they cannot continue their service. Which is what happened two weekends ago when their service was briefly shut down due to failed payments until they took out an emergency $5M loan to cover things.
- bena 8y ago
  > the actual cost of someone going to the theater is irrelevant here. The only cost that matters is what the theaters are charging since that is what MoviePass has to cover. These two things are tied. A theater is not going to give a discount it can't give. The theaters will not sell a ticket at a loss just because MoviePass is asking for 100 tickets at a time. MoviePass thought they could leverage being the source of a lot of sales into getting discounts from theater chains. But theaters are simply telling MoviePass that the prices are what they are. They make money elsewhere. Investing more into MoviePass really seems like throwing good money after bad.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
wild_preference 8y ago
This sort of sarcasm obfuscates your message. Frankly I don’t understand what you’re trying to say. Surely it’s best to just come out and say it without the noncommittal “it’s almost as if” deflection.
- bena 8y ago
  MoviePass was an attempt to disrupt things. As with a lot of "disruption", it's based on delivering something cheaper to the consumer. They thought they understood the costs and how they could provide more for less, but then they ran into a lot of issues that the established players have already solved. Usually at a cost. Another example is Uber. They're still losing money. And they've taken quite a few reputation hits as well. Mostly because they didn't fully understand or appreciate the cab business, which is what they essentially are. There's no one to screen drivers, so you have issues where drivers and passengers get in altercations at a greater frequency. Ride share drivers aren't required to actually know the area. And a host of other things that I'm sure I'm not aware of. And all those things do cost money. And those costs are included in the cab fares. Uber thought it could either circumvent those costs or were just ignorant of them. MoviePass thought it could present a deal but make it up either in bulk or by resting on whales. Theaters hardly deal in "bulk", especially post facto. You can buy out a screen in advance and you can usually negotiate a deal, but you must buy out the entire screen. And MoviePass does not have the userbase to justify that. And the customers of MoviePass aren't "whales". The people buying MoviePass are people who would find $30 a month for access to a theater a deal. People who see more than 2 or 3 movies a month. They went full underpants gnome on their business plan. I'm sure their step 2 was filled with convincing speeches and projections, but sometimes incredulity is the correct answer. "How do the plan on making money?" was something they apparently needed an answer for.

Weird, it's almost like theaters were charging what they charge for actual reasons rather than "corporate greed".

by bena 8y ago

Weird, it's almost like theaters were charging what they charge for actual reasons rather than "corporate greed".

Er... the actual cost of someone going to the theater is irrelevant here. The only cost that matters is what the theaters are charging since that is what MoviePass has to cover. If they can't cover that, they can't provide their service. It doesn't matter if the theater is charging $3 or $30 per ticket; if MoviePass cannot, at a bare minimum, cover that cost, they cannot continue their service. Which is what happened two weekends ago when their service was briefly shut down due to failed payments until they took out an emergency $5M loan to cover things.

bena 8y ago
> the actual cost of someone going to the theater is irrelevant here. The only cost that matters is what the theaters are charging since that is what MoviePass has to cover. These two things are tied. A theater is not going to give a discount it can't give. The theaters will not sell a ticket at a loss just because MoviePass is asking for 100 tickets at a time. MoviePass thought they could leverage being the source of a lot of sales into getting discounts from theater chains. But theaters are simply telling MoviePass that the prices are what they are. They make money elsewhere. Investing more into MoviePass really seems like throwing good money after bad.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

wild_preference 8y ago

This sort of sarcasm obfuscates your message. Frankly I don’t understand what you’re trying to say. Surely it’s best to just come out and say it without the noncommittal “it’s almost as if” deflection.

bena 8y ago
MoviePass was an attempt to disrupt things. As with a lot of "disruption", it's based on delivering something cheaper to the consumer. They thought they understood the costs and how they could provide more for less, but then they ran into a lot of issues that the established players have already solved. Usually at a cost. Another example is Uber. They're still losing money. And they've taken quite a few reputation hits as well. Mostly because they didn't fully understand or appreciate the cab business, which is what they essentially are. There's no one to screen drivers, so you have issues where drivers and passengers get in altercations at a greater frequency. Ride share drivers aren't required to actually know the area. And a host of other things that I'm sure I'm not aware of. And all those things do cost money. And those costs are included in the cab fares. Uber thought it could either circumvent those costs or were just ignorant of them. MoviePass thought it could present a deal but make it up either in bulk or by resting on whales. Theaters hardly deal in "bulk", especially post facto. You can buy out a screen in advance and you can usually negotiate a deal, but you must buy out the entire screen. And MoviePass does not have the userbase to justify that. And the customers of MoviePass aren't "whales". The people buying MoviePass are people who would find $30 a month for access to a theater a deal. People who see more than 2 or 3 movies a month. They went full underpants gnome on their business plan. I'm sure their step 2 was filled with convincing speeches and projections, but sometimes incredulity is the correct answer. "How do the plan on making money?" was something they apparently needed an answer for.