
AMC unveils answer to MoviePass - gandutraveler
https://variety.com/2018/film/news/amc-moviepass-2-1202851877/
======
15charlimit
Nobody wants a dozen different "movie subscriptions" just like nobody wants a
dozen different "streaming service" subscriptions.

The value of the early movers/original services is that they gave access to
EVERYTHING (or nearly everything) with a single login/payment.

Whatever value was originally generated by the first service is quickly lost
as soon as everyone and their dog gets greedy, spins up their own special
snowflake version of (service), and pulls their content out of the original
service. This forces consumers to choose between signing up & paying for a
dozen different services, or canceling everything and simply going back to the
convenience & ease of piracy, which, incidentally, makes everything from
everywhere available in a single location (value!).

~~~
chipotle_coyote
It's at least worth asking if the streaming future you implicitly envision
here -- where one service, presumably Netflix, becomes the gatekeeper for
nearly all commercial streaming content, dictating what is available to us to
watch and, by virtue of their market power, effectively dictating what
producers will be paid -- is really all silver lining and no cloud. (There are
also downsides to advocating piracy as the solution, and whether it's
convenient and easy is definitely in the eye of the beholder, but that's a
different discussion.)

For MoviePass vs. AMC Stubs Plus or whatever they're calling it, the market
dynamics are different from streaming, anyway; while there _are_ movies that
are released exclusively to specific theatre chains, they're few and far
between. So in practice, very few people are going to feel compelled to
subscribe to both services in order to see all movies -- they're going to
subscribe to one or the other.

Also, last but not least, there's strong evidence that the value to moviegoers
that MoviePass represents comes from a "the more you use our service, the more
money we lose" model. I am not sure that I would sneer at AMC as a "special
snowflake" for questioning the wisdom there.

~~~
BoiledCabbage
The answer is simple, non-lockin to any particular theater chain. Revenue of
the $20/mo is split across multiple theatre chains, and goers can see a movie
at any participating chain.

Theaters get predictable revenue and guaranteed income, and viewers get a bulk
discount.

All you can 'eat', and theater chain freedom are two different features. They
can still keep both.

~~~
s73v3r_
Except why would the big chains want to be involved, when they could create
their own with lock-in to their chain?

~~~
prepend
Because their own chain versions are bad ($20/month for 3 movies/week for just
AMC vs $10/month for 1movie/day anywhere) and will not be successful with
consumers.

This reminds me of the late 90s/early 2000s when record company’s response to
Napster/mp3 was to make worse services for more money. [0]

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PressPlay](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PressPlay)

~~~
s73v3r_
"Because their own chain versions are bad ($20/month for 3 movies/week for
just AMC vs $10/month for 1movie/day anywhere) and will not be successful with
consumers."

The AMC one also doesn't involve the dog and pony show you have to pull off
with MoviePass, it includes premium showings like IMAX and stuff, and if
you're in a place where most, if not all of your local theaters are AMC, it's
not a problem.

~~~
prepend
There are likely a few conditions where this made sense. Just like Pressplay
also had a few users.

But I’m willing to bet anyone a $100 value smart contract that this thing will
not exist for long.

------
tehwebguy
We liked MoviePass (pretty sure I even posted about it here). Then the CEO
went on an idiotic rampage about people “gaming the system” and we got caught
in the crossfire.

We used it about 1.5 x per month and loved it. Something came up one night and
we couldn’t see the movie we got tickets for. Then they changed to the once-
per-film policy, retroactively, meaning we could no longer rebook the movie we
missed.

I gave their awful customer service 4 attempts at fixing it via the app CS and
via Twitter DMs. Oh well!

Unlike some here I think they have a big opportunity— yes it’s built in
another industry’s back but if they do it right they can end up with their own
special events or even buy out distressed theaters and operate independently.
Think Netflix moving from licensing to O&O content. Seems like they won’t make
it that far though, subscribing to tickets in 2018 isn’t the same barrier of
entry as fast HD streaming in 2008 or whenever Netflix nailed it down.

~~~
samatman
The "Net" in Netflix started as a site where you could rent DVDs, a service
that, astonishingly, is still offered.

That was the barrier to entry: they had a customer base already paying them
for content. MoviePass has no comparable moat.

~~~
jsgo
1) our neighborhood doesn't have any typical internet providers in it
currently, so I actually prefer dvd.netflix.com

2) as someone else stated, Netflix streaming doesn't have everything whereas
dvd.netflix.com fills in a lot of content gaps.

~~~
samatman
There are a few long tail effects and the sum of it makes sense, sure.

The most salient is the difference between buying plastic and buying rights.

~~~
jsgo
Not disagreeing with the value in the streaming offering, just saying why
there is still a market for the rental-by-mail offering existing and why
Netflix would still retain the offer (my guess is they probably rip the movies
from the rentals and serve those in the streaming when licensing allows and
rather than treat the Blurays/DVDs as just a cost of doing business, continue
that operation).

~~~
scarface74
No streaming movie provider “rips” video from a DVD. Netflix gets a digital
master and encodes it to various formats/bit rates across an AWS hosted server
farm.

------
gringoDan
I always thought this is how this model would play out. MoviePass provided
proof of concept, but the theaters have no reason to play ball and enter a
revenue-sharing partnership with MoviePass when they can just launch their own
competing product.

AMC will make up for discounted ticket sales in concessions. Once you get
people into the theater, there are a lot of up-charge opportunities. Food &
drinks (and alcohol if they can get a liquor license) make up most of
theaters' profit.

I assume the UX will be better than MoviePass as well since ticketing should
be fully integrated - no need to physically go to the theater to purchase
tickets, find out that tickets for the movie you'd like to see are sold out,
swipe a different credit card, not be able to use the theater's rewards
program, upload your ticket stub to the app...when you think about it the UX
for MoviePass is actually pretty awful.

Doubt many people are seeing more than 3 movies a week anyways on MoviePass,
and several subscribers I know also pay for IMAX movies. For them it's a no-
brainer to pay $10 more per month to see (effectively) unlimited IMAX films.

~~~
rhino369
AMC also has a good relationship with movie distributors, who are the biggest
barrier to unlimited movie passes.

AMC can neogicate a revenue sharing model with the distributors, like Spotify
does. I’m guessing if a customer sees 15 movies in a month for 20 bucks, AMC
isn’t paying the distributors for 15 regular viewings. Probably more like (20
/ X viewings) * (1 - margin).

MoviePass cannot do that because threaters are middle men in their model.

------
jedberg
> MoviePass’s business model is controversial. ... It believes that the data
> it collects on consumer behavior will be so powerful that it will find
> alternative ways to make money.

They also shakedown local theaters. This happened right near me. They told the
theater that they want 50% of the concessions sales. The theater said no, so
Moviepass stopped supporting that theater. The theater lost so many concession
sales from Moviepass customers going elsewhere that they relented and agreed
to their 50% commission.

~~~
gamblor956
Interesting. I've heard from the managers at my local indie theaters (in LA)
that MoviePass tried to shake them down for concessions, then pulled their
theaters from the app when they refused...and then came back hat in hand 2
weeks later offering to take only 15% of concessions if the theaters would
take them back.

One did, because MoviePass customers at his theater actually purchased enough
extra concessions to justify it. The other did not, because the MoviePass
customers at his theater were cheapskates who tried to sneak in all their own
food and drinks.

~~~
dingaling
I must be a cheapskate because I never buy anything at the concession. I carry
a bottle of water in my bag. I'm there to watch a movie, not eat junk.

~~~
Larrikin
I really enjoy butter popcorn, but it's a complete waste of time to bother
clarifying the butter and cooking the popcorn for the only flavor of popcorn
that taste mediocre when it's not piping hot and that taste terrible the day.
If I I'm making popcorn I'm making any other flavor because I'll have also
have a snack for the rest of the week.

I exclusively save butter popcorn for the movies.

------
crooked-v
The key bits:

> On Tuesday, the theater chain will begin offering guests the chance to see
> up to three movies per week for the monthly fee of $19.95.

> However, AMC’s program offers some features that MoviePass has not matched.
> Namely, customers can see movies in premium formats such as IMAX, Dolby
> Cinema, and RealD. MoviePass can only be used for 2D films.

> The exhibitor said that subscribers will not be able to carryover movies
> from week to week if they see fewer than three. Unlike MoviePass, however,
> they can even see all three movies on the same day, and they can watch
> movies they have previously seen. Guests can also reserve tickets in
> advance.

~~~
ghaff
None of the articles are explicit but I assume that the subscription can only
be used for one ticket at a time; i.e. you can't see one movie per week with 2
guests.

~~~
e1ven
In their FAQ
([https://www.amctheatres.com/faqs/alist](https://www.amctheatres.com/faqs/alist))
it says that only the subscription holder can use the tickets.

They check for a photo id on check-in.

~~~
ghaff
That's what I figured. The limit seems pretty sensible. Most people won't hit
it most of the time, even if they're pretty heavy movie watchers, but it
probably prevents usage that's really unprofitable.

------
scarface74
This is not a bad deal. I could never get my dad who is a frequent movie goer
to deal with the complexity of Movie Pass. But this he would go for. If you
see two movies in a month you would break even - even if it’s not a movie you
would pay money to see. My wife an I look at the movies as either worth paying
full price, a “Plex Original”, or not worth even taking the time to wait for
it to “fall off the back of a truck”. We might go out and see our Plex
Originals.

I would probably buy her the pass at least because she doesn’t work during the
Summer and she would see more movies between both our son and the two of us.

If you see even one IMAX 3D movie it’s worth the cost and unlike Movie Pass,
we can order online and reserve seating in advance.

~~~
ghaff
Yeah, it seems pretty reasonable if this chain is convenient for you. I don't
have theaters convenient for me so I don't tend to go out and would mostly
rather watch at home anyway. But going to a few movies a month is hardly in
compulsive movie viewing territory and a lot of people prefer to go to the
theater for various reasons.

I'd be curious how much AMC thinks they'll make on the actual pass and how
much on add-on business (subscriber bringing a guest, food & beverage).

~~~
scarface74
I didn’t think about the subscriber bringing a guest. Most people don’t go to
the movies alone.

~~~
ghaff
Exactly. So if I'm a subscriber who goes to a lot of movies and don't have a
specific partner who always goes with me, I'll be inclined to drag along
various friends who might not otherwise have paid for a ticket and gone to the
theater.

------
456hdsaq234g
Also important: MoviePass parent, Helios and Matheson’s. Stock was trading at
$38.86 a share in October 2017. $0.44 today. Yeaaah moviepass is screwed (I am
a subscriber who likes the product but understand it is completely
unsustainable).

~~~
rory096
For some additional context, HMNY was at $2.50 in _September_ 2017.

------
adjkant
As a Moviepass user I'm likely gonna ride it til it dies then switch to this
because:

1\. Online ticketing means I can see a movie even the first night and not
worry about selling out since you have to get to the theatre to buy the ticket

3\. The concession rewards will def be nice too.

4\. The IMAX/3D option is nice even if I don't use it much.

This was very smart and calculated by AMC, especially on the release date. It
doesn't look like Moviepass has more than a few months left and won't be able
to adjust to this. I'm also hoping this will force Regal to do the same
because frankly, it's a better theatre when available.

I'll miss Moviepass and glad it came, but I don't see any way it lasts. I'm
just glad I got the chance to burn the VC money towards over 40 movies in the
past 10 months for the low price of $2.5 a movie.

Honestly though, this deal is surprisingly good as well and wondering if it
goes away after Moviepass dies. The 12 month price guarantee is amazing too
though.

~~~
mrrsm
It is 3 movies per week. Which chances are is more then what the average
person is seeing weekly anyways.

~~~
adjkant
Oh WOW. I misread that. Wow that's a deal. Edited my comment accordingly.

------
mikestew
Ouch. MoviePass' parent company was already down 30% this morning on news that
they want to do a reverse split. Then 20 minutes later AMC lets this loose. I
can't imagine that it was coincidence.

~~~
rory096
HMNY was up 26.7% yesterday, all in the last half hour of trading. It's now
down about 8% (or 3¢) on Monday's close.

------
AustinGrandt
Been a MoviePass subscriber for a long time (back when it was $30+) and I am
still a big fan, but this offering has me honestly thinking about switching.

I already pay for AMC stubs and go to AMC the majority of the time. Combined
with being able to book beforehand, go to premieres, and see the 1 or 2 movies
in IMAX that I want to each year this could be good.

Only drawback is AMC's pass not having the flexibility/number of theater's
with MoviePass, especially for more indie theaters where I live. Curious to
see how MoviePass responds (if at all)

------
maerF0x0
And here I just bought a Sinemia[1] pass (billed annually) ... ~$10 per month
for 2 tickets for 2ppl per month (4tickets total). I do like that I can
reserve 2 tickets at once though (seats beside eachother)

[1]: [https://www.sinemia.com/new-plans](https://www.sinemia.com/new-plans)

------
zaroth
$240/year seems way too steep for me. And 3 movies per _week_ is too many.

Perhaps if it included 2 guest passes a month it would be significantly more
compelling.

Rule of thumb, Recurring monthly revenue is worth 5x the one time purchase. If
my actual utilization averages out to once a week I want to be paying closer
to $10/mo for the $50 of al la carte tickets.

It doesn’t matter to me that it’s AMC only because I have a great local AMC
and they carry all the movies I would expect them to.

If you could pre-pay for a certain number of months of it, it could be a
pretty neat gift idea.

------
jzl
An interesting question here is whether this will ever affect what AMC
ultimately pays the movie studios. In the same way that Moviepass had to pay
AMC the full ticket price for each admission, I'm sure that for now AMC will
have to pay the studios their full cut for each admission. But will the
exhibitors start approaching the studios about working out a revenue sharing
model for subscription passes that's not tied to individual admissions?

------
jccalhoun
The only theater in my town is an AMC "Classic" which means they don't have
Imax, or Dolby Cinema and I don't care about 3d so I think I'll stay with
Moviepass as long as AMC accepts it.

------
joshwa
> Since 2002, ticket prices have increased by 54%, while ticket sales have
> fallen 22%.

The movie-theater industry seems to make it seem like the former is a reaction
to the latter, but it's probably the opposite.

Wouldn't the rational economic reaction to falling ticket sales be to _reduce_
prices?

~~~
kemitche
It's rational only if you expect that lowering prices would result in enough
additional volume to increase profits.

If you can boost your prices by 50% and only lose 20% of your sales, that
seems like a win in terms of net profit.

~~~
ghaff
Especially when there are so many other forces that probably are causing
people to go to movies less. Other entertainment options (no streaming in
2002). Bigger/better TVs in many homes.

Honestly, you could tell me I could go to a local movie theater for free and
it wouldn't change my behavior (to rarely go) one bit.

------
klosnet
AMC fires people for wearing MAGA hats.

------
ksec
I am naturally going to assume people will be uneasy with AMC having their
data compared to MoviePass since they are now owned by Chinese?

~~~
ceejayoz
"This guy likes comic book movies" seems like a pretty minimal data point.
China can have that info on me, if they really want to pay for it.

------
pkaye
I don't find enough good movies in the theatres that warrants paying for a
subscription plan.

~~~
mieseratte
Personally, I feel the same way. Never really did enjoy the cinema experience,
maybe seeing one or two movies per year, and as we head deeper into a world
packed with $FRANCHISE films, I end up having less and less major releases to
care about.

One of the folks at work has the MoviePass subscription, and while he does
like going to the movies it sounds like he ends up going a lot just because he
has it.

To the folks that have MoviePass: Were y'all already going to the movies
frequently, or do you end up going more because of MoviePass?

~~~
456hdsaq234g
Went to cinema less than once a year without moviepass. Now maybe once a
month?

~~~
pkaye
If you go once a month do you save money with the moviepass? I usually get
discounted tickets from Costco when I want to watch.

~~~
mieseratte
Not all markets have MoviePass _and_ CostCo. I grew up in the wealthiest
county in my state, and we still didn't have a CostCo, but we had plenty of
theaters.

------
dreamcompiler
Most new movies suck. Not even 80%, but more like 95% are just derivative crap
designed to make most of their money on the international market with CGI
spectacle rather than good writing. I'm perfectly happy to pay full price for
the one movie I see a month in the theater I like, especially since MoviePass
and the like are just more I-am-the-product fuckery.

------
kakarot
I don't spend $240 a year at the theatre and I have no intention of starting
now.

If this is the best AMC can do while keeping a margin, then we might be in
trouble.

~~~
Felz
This is very interesting, because I wouldn't want to spend that much on movies
either. Yet a decade ago, people were happy paying $1000 a year for a cable
subscription. Not directly the same value proposition, but similar.

It seems like the price people are willing to pay for entertainment has gone
down significantly, in sync with it becoming far cheaper and more abundant. So
movie theaters are in trouble if they're selling entertainment by quantity,
because the supply only goes up.

I think they're more successful selling cultural commonality; you watch the
latest popular release so that you can talk about it with other people, and
the marketing has already gotten you excited about it. (I find being pre-
excited about something and thus not having to learn about and pick from a
huge array of options a value-add all on its own)

~~~
ghaff
>Yet a decade ago, people were happy paying $1000 a year for a cable
subscription.

Many still do. Including myself but this will probably be the year I drop it
even though I get no live TV otherwise.

~~~
throwaway413
Without a doubt my favorite subscription has been YouTube TV. Can’t recommend
enough (no affiliation whatsoever).

~~~
nervousvarun
just curious how much do you pay for your internet connection?

At $50/month + the $40 for Youtube TV you'd be over $1000 a year (not that
this was what you were responding to but I'm curious as thread started w/
$1000 year).

~~~
s73v3r_
Yeah, but in general, wouldn't it be $50/month + $60-70/month for cable and
internet?

~~~
nervousvarun
Right. Was going with $50/month for internet (but I personally can't get it
near that cheap) and $40 for YT TV which puts you at $1080/yr.

I guess my real point is who ISN'T paying $1000/yr now? You pay almost that
much for the internet package alone in a lot of America.

