AMC theaters will no longer show Universal movies

Why do you care?

 

Surprisingly, it can. If you were to average all shows at every showtime in a multiplex, I doubt that it would average that much during normal times. From what I was seeing last year at the AMC Coral Ridge 10 cinema in Fort Lauderdale, I would bet that figure would be more like 20%..

If a ticket is $10 and a typical multiplex theater could seat 100 people at 5-shows per day. That would be $100/day or $3,000/mo.

Times ten theaters = $30,000/mo. Times a 50% per-ticket split, would net $15,000/mo.

I don't know a theater's actual numbers, but I bet that would be in the ballpark, to break even.

Anything above that would be profit.

All the profit is made at the concession stand.

I am currently in Pigeon Forge Tennessee and they have a small multiplex here with stadium seating and the show first run movies, all showtimes for $5. A hot dog at the concession stand is only $2.

Dolly Parton operates five live shows here, outside of Dollywood and they can operate at 25% and keep the doors open. They also do a good bit of business on food and at the concession stand.

Member @Chris DeVoe be a good person to ask how full an average theater was last year. His wife should have a good idea, with all of the movies she attends?

 

Yeah, I miss it too - partly because we're not getting new movies like we would expect. Everything's being delayed!

At least the postponements happened in what seemed to be a "down year" for big ticket films, so we're missing out on fewer big movies than would've been the case last year...

 

We are unusual moviegoers, and deliberately watched them contrary to the ordinary. Ordinary people go see big movies on the weekend. We never did, because we were looking for the best experience. Weekends were for Art House movies, and foreign language. We would see the big films on weeknights, to avoid the crowds. The only time we would bother to see a big film with a crowd would be an opening night, if we specifically wanted to see it with the most enthusiastic crowd possible like a Marvel movie.

So we would not be a good choice to know how things would be for the regular crowd.

We're like Younger Bear in Little Big Man and do everything backwards.

 

And another thing while I'm here....keep seeing people online and on shows saying that this is the end for cinemas, people will stream etc etc.

Just don't agree. Cinema has been going for 100 odd years, it has survived TV and then video/DVD/BR...yet people are still going to the cinema and seeing blockbusters like the Marvel films which take a billion a go, or indie films like Uncut Gems or Parasite.

People still want to and like going to the cinema. Streaming will not kill it. Not in two years or ten years.

 

Well that's what they have said.

As for the cost - I wouldn't pay $20 to rent a film either. I wouldn't pay $20 to buy it either. If I'm paying that much I want a Blu Ray. But if you have a family it may be value for you, or if you are having some kind of party and having some friends over to see a film and you all chipped in.

Still, for kids it's an expensive thing for most people. If I had young kids I would just get Disney+ and tell them to watch something on there rather than shelling out $20 for a 48hour rental.

 

That's the Pay Per View price being charged for a 48 hour rental of a new release (Trolls and a few others).

 

Marc nails the situation: (1:02:00)

 

I am hoping that AMC and Universal will be able to work something out. AMC is my favorite theater because of Dolby Cinema. It is more expensive, but worth it to me. I would like to see the next Jurassic World in Dolby Cinema.

One of my son's favorite movies is Despicable Me, which is a Universal movie that we have watched many, MANY times. He still gets excited when the Universal music starts and yells "Daddy, it's Universal!".

 

Ok that seems like a tad of an over reaction...

 

So...get rid of as many jobs as possible. Got it.

 

Varies wildly. Bigger populations squeeze out bigger prices.

 

Vancouver still has 1 rental business called "Black Dog Video" with 2 locations. Between the 2 stores they have 7,000 unique titles. In Canada they have less than half of that number available for streaming.

I know only several cities have a local option like that, but just wanted to point it out for perspective.

 

makes sense I guess...thanks.

 

thanks!

 

That's interesting to know.

Before I started selling off my VHS tape collection in around 2000, I had 3,800 unique movies in the collection.

You mean that two decades ago, I had more movies in my private collection than Canada has for streaming today?

 

We Need Your Help! | Black Dog Video

I guess so. Netflix Canada selection pales in comparison to the US. I'm sure some clever Canadians pay for the US version with proxy IP addresses or whatever.

 

Hypothetically, let's say you can register at Universal and from there pay $20 to watch a new movie with the same restrictions as there now are. However, dDue to registering and all you will get a Blu Ray copy of the movie, free of charge, directly from Universal. Would you do it then?

 

Rent and get the Blu-ray? Yes, for certain films i know I will rewatch.

 

I get this retort all the time and I'm waiting for it:

The days of consuming our way to prosperity are over. Finally.

 

If you add up all of the available streaming options in Canada (basically the same as the USA) you'll be deep into the thousands for sure. For movie channels like Super Channel or Hollywood Suite it would be economic suicide to pay licensing fees on 3,800 titles, Hollywood Suite for example rotates their lineup every month, usually 100-150 titles.

 

Big Theatre Chains Face Federal Scrutiny For Exclusivity Demands – Deadline

The next time a big movie opens, just look at the theaters in your area showing it - you won’t see it at competing theaters due to an exclusivity deal.

 

If I read that article right, it indicates the big chains tried to shut out the small ones. That's not the same as "won't see it at competing theaters" - I've never seen a big movie here play at AMC but not Regal, for instance.

I would agree that it sucks the big chains would try to shut out the small ones. Clearly not just AMC who wants to do that, though...

 

It happens near me all the time, a big film (say, one of the Star Wars franchise films) will show at one chain for its first opening weeks but not at another.

But point being I find it hypocritical of AMC to do this to Universal after they partake in actions like this.

 

Are there 2 or more major chains involved?

Because I know the big movies play at both Regal and AMC here.

Honestly, the only "exclusives" we ever see in the DC area are for "art house" movies that aren't gonna get much exhibition anyway. Those often play at only a couple of indie places.

But when a "Star Wars" or MCU flick opens, it opens at all the brands here!