> I would gladly pay $20 to see new movies in my home
I'm not sure many people would. $20 seems astronomically expensive to me to see a single movie. I don't think I could ever justify that.
I'm not sure many people would. $20 seems astronomically expensive to me to see a single movie. I don't think I could ever justify that.
On top of that, of course, you get the benefits of home-movie watching generally, such as being able to pause or reverse the movie back or forward if you wish, cheap snacks and candy (since you're not paying movie theater prices), and so on.
$20 is definitely not a terrible deal, especially if more than one person might be watching.
1. Pay to "own"[0]: ~$10
2. Pay to rent for 24h or so: ~$5
3. Unlimited streaming of all titles: ~$15/mo
It'd be a bit weird to pay $20 for #2, even for a first-run movie. I get that the price we pay doesn't always reflect just the seller's cost (sometimes we pay more just for the perception of a premium product), but it's hard to justify paying an extra $15 for the costs of running a theater when you aren't actually going to that theater.
I get that there are certainly people who would value that (like the OP who has kids and can't get out with his wife to go to the theater), but I expect most people of average means would balk at $20 for home viewing, and just wait for a normal rental price or for it to appear on whichever AYCE streaming service the subscribe to.
[0] Scare-quotes because of course the download you get is still DRMed, which means you don't really truly own the copy.
I regularly pay $4-5 to watch streaming 4k movies, even ones where I know I own the DVD and hence have a copy on my NAS that I could watch for free.
Vs: $20-30 at home, where you can pause etc and microwave your own popcorn for under $2
I remember the ticket being around $14 and the popcorn and drink being around $20, just for myself... It's been a few months, so I may be off by $2-3 on each portion, but the sticker shock was real... I'd be more open to $20-30 and staying home.
n=1: $13+food
n=2: $26+food
n=4 (2 kids): $46 + food
Unfortunately, it doesn't _feel_ that way. We still haven't seen Mulan yet, though, and I'm not sure if price is a factor in that. I suspect it's a small factor -- we subscribed to Disney+ to see Hamilton, for example -- but it just hasn't come up in months. I forgot about it until writing this comment.
It's hard to convince myself that I should pay $20 or $30 for a screening, when a year from now I can likely rent it on Prime for $10 or less.
There are ways to justify a $20 movie rental, but it feels different to go spend that at a theater vs paying it at home. I will wager that it's a much harder decision to make as the value proposition is different.
If they are poor, yes. If they are rich, no one cares.
> 20 movie rental, but it feels different to go spend that at a theater
It costs a lot more than $20 for 4 people to go to the theater.
Eh, not really, and that's not really the point. The gist 8is split amongst everybody (all your friends getting value out of the same $20) even if you're still paying the whole amount.
Plus when this happens usually they'll bring food and drinks, or they'll do similar when at their house, or cover you when the next time you go out, etc. So it all evens out.
It's the same concept as having a BBQ. You're not the only person eating the bbq but you likely bought it and ate doing the cooking lol