Mitch Lowe co-founded Netflix, now he's hacking movie night
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
The real product is a new model for subscription services based on the issuing of prepaid payment cards and a payment system that enforces how it is paid.
That's pretty huge.
Imagine your employer giving a transit allowance and food allowance via this, and that it could only be used on a given transit mode and with the n local places to the work place, at some set amounts per month.
Or that parents could use a Uni subscription card that allows for purchases from the campus grocery store and the bookshop to be capped at a reasonable rate.
This is essentially a new breed of subscription that can be used across multiple outlets and yet have a set of controls built into it that make it seem more like a coupon.
As a new mechanism for subscriptions... this is far bigger than the cinema model.
You could even allow for the creation of custom controls to create subscription models that are totally personalised, or go further and sell this capability to other businesses.
I think they currently cater to individuals, but they seem to be in a much better position to pivot towards employers providing allowances to employees, allowing them to restrict what that they could spend it on.
A bunch of unis already have this model and their own card for it, and even extend purchases to local businesses
All the local book stores to campus take it, grocery stores, and I believe even Target and some bars and restaurants now.
With the control mechanisms you have the basis of a food subscription, a book subscription... allowances for very specific purposes at a rate that is pre-determined and could be set per retailer or even for specific products if such integration were achieved.
This is what makes it more interesting than any pre-paid card or coupon system.
The beer analogy may have been misleading, though. You can indeed get 4 beers for €8, but the standard size of a beer here is 300 ml, which is much less than a pint (568 ml I think).
I don't have Netflix subscription. Because where I live Netflix catalogue is laughable - this is one of the reasons. Anyway, that's another matter.
I really like watching films in theatres and prices are going sky high. Some of the films turn out to be really bad and I would rather like to leave in the middle (of course not walking out abruptly blocking others' views). Something like MoviePass could be very handy to me.
I remember when the price drop happened there were articles circulating that MoviePass aimed to make a profit by collecting the data they get from the movie goers. Which makes more sense when you realize that Helios and Matheson Analytics owns a majority share of MoviePass.
http://www.odeon.co.uk/limitless/ https://www.cineworld.co.uk/unlimited
I still think it's an incredibly good deal vs buying a ticket @£12 for one film
But definitely still a good deal even if you only go twice a month.
Here in the UK and in Europe people would get the cheap tickets and then still smuggle their own drinks and snacks into the movies, because that's what we've always done and that's the culture here - especially among the millenials who think they can outsmart everything and everyone and feel entitled so. Also people on this side of the pond don't really fancy the massive buckets of sugary drinks or XXL sized hot dogs like our American friends.
I do that because the cinemas don't sell anything at their concession stand I want to or can eat.
> massive buckets of sugary drinks
Don't forget the massive buckets of popcorn - you can easily clear 600+ calories in a single medium portion.
While I agree with your comment mostly this bit seems ridiculous. When it comes to going to the cinema in particular I find (anecdotally obviously) that it is the older generation unwilling to pay for snacks. I've lost count of how many times people of my parents generation have asked me to fill my pockets with all kinds of stuff when I, the broke millennial, am happy to pay for a drink/snack. I think the last time my friends or I tried to sneak in food/drink was when we were young teenagers below working age.
And the article compares it to Uber , but I highly doubt that Uber is making that heavy of a loss when someone hails a cab ! Infact Uber even takes a cut of each transaction unlike Moviepass . What could i be missing ?
I agree with you - I can't see any kind of future where the theatres go "Oh, you're bringing more people in and we're making more money from consumables. Sure, please, have some of our profits!"
(Of course, people also buy subscriptions and then don't get around to using them much but I suspect the revenue sharing is key. I'd also wonder though if the theater chains aren't really in a better position to go this route.)
Page 17 or so is good: "We predominantly license “first-run” films from distributors owned by major film production companies and from independent distributors on a film-by-film and theatre-by-theatre basis. Film exhibition costs are accrued based on the applicable admissions revenues and estimates of the final settlement pursuant to our film licenses. Licenses that we enter into typically state that rental fees are based on aggregate terms established prior to the opening of the picture."
and then: "Food and beverage sales are our second largest source of revenue after box office admissions."
The ratio, seen later in the document, is basically 65% admissions, 33% food/beverage.
(This surprised me, I had thought it was around 25% admissions.)
I don't see theaters being willing to give up any of that in exchange for a vague promise of extra customers.
On the other hand, I don't see why theaters feel antagonistic towards a company that promises to take investment money and buy full-price tickets with it. That's a complete win for the theaters.
So, you sign up for 10USD a month, for unlimited cinema visits. Any more than one visit means that Moviepass loses money.
So while they are selling you this service... they also need to do everything in their power to ensure you don't use it. Buried in the terms and conditions and innocuous sounding statement which gives them the unrestricted right to warp your understanding of reality.
For example, you're walking down the street on your way to see Guardians of the Galaxy 15: 2Guardians2Galaxy when you receive a text message indicating incoming North Korean ICBMs... this is it... you quickly check some news sites (which they access to through an information sharing agreement, or by sub-contracting to a money starved NSA) and they all say the same thing: to have any hope of survival you need to get out of the city now... and find shelter.
Obviously by the time you figure it was all a fake you've missed your showing and need to wait another 24 hours, when they'll have another more extreme and equally convincing scenario to distract you.
I can even envisage that they'll start sub-contracting this out mech-turk style. "$1 to convince 1000 people not to go to the cinema today using information warfare" that kind of thing.
In case this isn't the true play, any VCs out their let me know, I'm seeking 10MUSD for 15%. My MVP is this post.
If I were AMC I would buy this company just to shut it down.
>"That price level is unsustainable and only sets up consumers for ultimate disappointment down the road if or when the product can no longer be fulfilled," the company said.
Is pretty much the definition of BS.