Why Did Anyone Think MoviePass Could Have Worked? | Hacker News Reader

Why Did Anyone Think MoviePass Could Have Worked?

slate.com

19 pointsCPLX6 comments

Movie theaters are all scrambling to host event screenings and upgrade their seating and projectors since they're discovering people are having a better time at home for less money. The wait between theater and home availability is getting smaller and smaller, and streaming services are building a significant body of original content.

Moviepass could have a functional formula at 4 movies a month, IMO. Moviepass is the first widespread means of collecting viewer analytics across multiple theaters.

Unlimited viewing doesn't seem to fit the current landscape, even excluding the people that go and see the same movie multiple times. The studios expect to make too much money, and will only accept being boiled slowly.

It might not work, but I like what it caused movie theatres to do - compete. Cinemark now has some $8.99/mo thing that gives you a free movie ticket each month, they don't expire, you can roll them over, and you get discounts on concessions.

I don't have MoviePass but this has already been worth it.

In the end, it's gotten me (and friends) back into movie theatres again. Then we still end up buying/renting the movies from iTunes later.

I thought it would work too, though. The gym membership model. People subscribe, forget they're paying for it, get too busy, and don't go. Then MoviePass rakes in a bunch of money. Clearly that didn't happen.

Moviepass should’ve gotten wholesale prices a tenth of the ticket to make it sustainable. At the end of the day, that’s 10x more traffic to concessions etc that theatres can absorb. They also could’ve worked out a profit sharing deal with the movie manufacturers similar to how streaming services pay rights holders.

Why would they continue this after moviepass is dead.

Did customers really think it was going to work as a lasting enterprise, or did they just jump on to get some cheap movies before it went under?

Cheap before it went under seems to be the consensus I’m aware of.

There is no real disincentive to sign up, and if you saw any movies you saved money - I think it would have probably made financial sense to sign up before buying tickets and just use it as a discount.

The important thing though is that it does not cost those customers when it fails (unless they haven’t seen a movie since their last payment) as the break even for customers was afaict a single movie.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com