
AMC Theaters to MoviePass: Not Welcomed Here - mudil
http://investor.amctheatres.com/file/Index?KeyFile=389925821
======
pwinnski
AMC can say whatever they like, but it's hard to see how they could block
this.

I was a MoviePass subscriber a few years ago (at $40/month, not $10!), and how
it worked was that I had a MasterCard that would work to buy one movie ticket
every 24 hours. It had my name, my billing zipcode. I'm not sure how AMC could
have known it was MoviePass. They certainly did nothing to stop it when I was
using it then.

~~~
justboxing
I prefer dealflicks' business model. I understand it's a somewhat different
use case from what MoviePass is doing. They (dealflicks) partner with the
movie theaters to sell tickets at discount last minute etc like Hotel Tonight.
This is mutually benefitial to both parties, as the Theatre is able to fill
seats ( at a slight discount ) that would otherwise go empty, and dealflicks
get a commission for helping fill those empty seats.

I came across their site
[https://www.dealflicks.com/](https://www.dealflicks.com/) while helping a
friend research / validate his MVP (he wanted to do the exact same thing, like
a last minute deals for movie tickets).

------
whipoodle
This is weird. It says MoviePass will pay them the full ticket price when a
pass holder goes to a movie in their theaters. Leaving aside how exactly that
is supposed to work financially for MoviePass, what is AMC's actual problem
with this? It's just a bunch of "not in the best interest of blah blah".

~~~
noonespecial
It (the linked statement) seems to read "we don't like this at all but it
looks like there's nothing we can do about it right now, but we're sure going
to look for a way to stop it".

The part they don't like is probably the general feeling that this will
devalue their product. Ticket prices already "feel" high to the general
public. Having advertised services out there (even if ultimately untenable)
that drastically undercut standard prices will not help this perception at
all.

~~~
whipoodle
Yeah, that makes sense. This still leaves them in the position of griping
about getting money when people see movies in their theaters, though.

~~~
pooloo1
MoviePass would have brought more viewers to their establishment. The customer
would now have saved $10 on admission, and can now use that towards
concessions. Since their concessions are basically 1000% markup, its pure
profit for them.

I don't understand their complaint other than, they didn't think of it first.

~~~
infogulch
No they're still making full price on tickets too, it's just that the money is
coming from some VC that's willing to dump it for a bunch of data instead of
directly from the customer.

------
wmf
When Amazon sold ebooks below cost, it benefited Amazon. AMC sees that
MoviePass is an attempt to Kindle them so they're pre-emptively refusing to
"negotiate" how much control of their business to give up.

------
mudil
MoviePass seems to many and to AMC as just another attempt by some unicorn
tech outfit to ride the coattails of those who actually did the work to build
the movies and theaters and so forth, and try to ultimately undercut and co-
opt them, like Netflix is doing. AMC should be fighting, probably.

It takes real money to make movies and sell them. Just like it takes real
money to make TV shows, and design new fashions, and create new
foodstuffs...This whole let's make a subscription service out of everything is
getting kinda stale...

I guess ultimately it depends on how deep MoviePasses pockets are...

~~~
t0mbstone
Maybe AMC should release their own movie pass subscription service then,
instead of keeping their heads up their ass in the dark ages.

~~~
WhiteOwlLion
Or have AMC make their own movies since they are leeching off the movie
creators after all.

------
fred_is_fred
I can't see how that was written with a straight face by a lawyer. If the
average ticket price for an AMC movie is $9.33 how I will be "disappointed"
for getting unlimited monthly movies for $10/mo. AMC sure has a lot of fake
concern for someone else's business model. Really this is about control, not
concern for consumers.

~~~
adfm
It may have changed since I was a kid, but from what I recall, the ticket cost
goes straight to the distributor and the theater makes its money on
concessions. This model seems perfect for the smaller venues you'd want to
actually go to (Alamo Drafthouse, etc.) rather than the blown out, trash
compactor megaplex you subconsciously avoid because you'll wait for it to hit
Netflix rather than endure the long lines, bad parking, and apathy that tends
to crush the moviegoing experience.

~~~
WhiteOwlLion
The gross revenue shifts toward the movie theatre the longer the movie is
released. It may be a revenue split 90/10 first week, then theatre gets bigger
cut each week. This is why second-run movie theatres can still make money
showing two movies for one ticket price aside from concession sales.

------
denkmoon
I see perhaps 1.5 movies per year, mostly because the value proposition is not
good.

To see a single movie in the non-shitty cinema, with a drink and popcorn will
run me up about $35AU. I still have to watch 20 minutes worth of ads at the
beginning too, so we'll boost that up to $40AU for wasting my time and
brainpower. That gets me about 2hrs entertainment.

Why would I do that when I can pirate your movie in a few months and watch it
at home, infinitely cheaper? Only the rare exceptional movie is actually worth
the "cinematic experience" (ie. Dunkirk). Something like Guardians of the
Galaxy or Deadpool is perfectly fine watching on my TV and Soundbar.

You can skip the ads and tell people off for talking during the movie in your
own home too.

