Tag Archives: John Fithian

Stop Whining And Be Grateful For Those Cheap Cinema Tickets

Borat movie ticket The LA Time’s cinema columnist ‘Projector’ has a humorous op-ed piece echoing the NATO/MPAA song that going to the cinema is still the cheapest form of entertainment. Not just compared to going to a sporting event or visiting the opera, but even compared to trips to the picture palace of yesteryear. But he doesn’t fall for the popcorn merchants propaganda hook-line and sinker:

Of course, Projector is too savvy to entirely buy the exhibitors’ assertion that movies “remain the most affordable form of out-of-home entertainment.” They never considered a brisk 5K jog around the Rose Bowl, nor open-mike poetry night at many coffeehouses.

And movie popcorn and other snacks are notoriously pricey, which explains why theaters generate roughly 20% of their revenue but 40% of their profit at the concession stand.

Ironically, the high cost of goodies helps moviegoers, according to new research from Stanford University and UC Santa Cruz, because concession revenue enables theaters to keep ticket prices in check. Projector, who only went to a state school, can’t argue with that logic.

There is even some advice for the savvier cinema goer:

Frequent filmgoers can save several hundreds of dollars a year by selecting theaters and showtimes carefully. Sure, the Rolling Stones’ concert movie “Shine a Light” is worth $15 a ticket on a large Imax screen at the AMC CityWalk Stadium 19, but if cash is tight, consider a $5 matinee of whatever is playing at the pleasant-enough, single-screen Vista Theatre in Los Feliz. Some chains also offer bulk ticket discounts, but beware of any restrictions.

If your movie is showing at the mall, you can live dangerously by smuggling in a Mrs. Fields cookie or a packet of sour gummy worms, thereby supporting a broader swath of the economy. Projector, of course, can’t condone such a potentially flagrant violation of theater policy. He’s just sayin’.

Those interested in the Stanford University and UC Santa Cruz concession revenue report can find out more here. From the press release:

The findings empirically answer the age-old question of whether it’s better to charge more for a primary product (in this case, the movie ticket) or a secondary product (the popcorn). Putting the premium on the “frill” items, it turns out, indeed opens up the possibility for price-sensitive people to see films. That means more customers coming to theaters in general, and a nice profit from those who are willing to fork it over for the Gummy Bears.

Indeed, movie exhibition houses rely on concession sales to keep their businesses viable. Although concessions account for only about 20 percent of gross revenues, they represent some 40 percent of theaters’ profits. That’s because while ticket revenues must be shared with movie distributors, 100 percent of concessions go straight into an exhibitor’s coffers.

Although if distributors could decide they would get a share of that revenue and profit as well. Equally interesting is another finding:

In another study examining Spanish theaters, the researchers discovered: Moviegoers who purchase their tickets over the Internet also tend to buy more concession items than those who purchase them at the door, by phone, at kiosks, or at ATMs (the latter option has not yet hit the United States). More research is needed to figure out why, but for now this suggests that theaters may want to be sure to partner with an Internet service to make such ticketing available–or even take the function in-house.

People who come to the movies in groups also tend to buy more popcorn, soda, and candy, Hartmann and Gil found. While this, too, merits more investigation, it may be that such groups comprise families or teenagers. “If that turns out to be the case, it may be that theaters will want to run more family- or adolescent-oriented movies to attract a more concession-buying crowd,” Hartmann says.

No surprise there either that John Fithian is arguing for more PG films. He knows which side his popcorn are butter coated on. Those wishing to download the research paper can find it in PDF form here.

Photo credit: www.mobilnews.cz/blog

Popularity: 33% [?]

D-Cinema Frustrations Aired At NAB

Despite the slew of news stories coming out of the Digital Cinema Summit at the NAB Show this past weekend there was little new to report regarding technological advances and nascent business deals. In fact, the if the only real news that seemed to come out of the summit was the frustration over the fact that there was little new to talk about.

Michael KaragosianBecause the summit is held a month after ShoWest the expectation going in was that nothing major would be announced by major players in the space such as studios, integrators or vendors, though some industry players used the forum to voice their opinions, controversial or not, about the lack of speed with which d-cinema is being adopted. Attendees were dealt a one-two punch during the Sunday sessions by speakers Michael Karagosian of MKPE and John Fithian, the President and CEO, National Association of Theatre Owners.

Moderating a morning panel discussion titled “The Exhibition Perspective: Truth and Consequences in the D-Cinema Rollout” Karagosian highlighted the issues acting as roadblocks to d-cinema adoption, including the dwindling virtual print fees (VPFs)studios are willing to pay. Some studios, such as Warner Bros. have been slow to sign up to VPF agreements, or haven’t signed them at all. According to The Hollywood Reporter Karagoisan suggested:

. . . .that if one major studio held back annually on just two blockbuster titles that the exhibitor contributions might grow from 20% to 32% of the total.

This could be a real problem since, as Karagosian pointed out, the cost for an exhibitor to make the conversion to digital could be as high as 200% – 300% more than sticking with current film based systems over the next 25-years.

John FithianAfter lunch, John Fithian gave a dutch uncle keynote address which had everyone buzzing, since he played no punches in pointing out the pending “train wreck” the industry could be headed for if the number of d-cinema installations don’t increase before 2009 when studios plan on releasing 10 films in digital 3-D, including James Cameron’s “Avatar”. Variety reports that Fithian stated of the upcoming releases:

“We don’t have the screens for them. We have less than 1,000 3-D screens in the U.S. and fewer than that in the rest of the world.”

Fithian then turned his attention to the stalemate occurring between studios and exhibitors over VPFs which are meant to subsidize the rollout of D-cinema equipment.

“Unless the deals are done in the next month or two we won’t have time to do the installations in time. We literally need the deals now to make the slate work. If the studios want this to happen in time for 2009, the deals have to be struck, and they have to be struck right now.”

Whether VPF agreements start closing or not some exhibitors may still take a wait and see approach. Mark Collins of Marcus Theatres, who participated in Karagosian’s panel discussion, said of his circuit’s conversion to digital:

“We have not seen any cost benefits. We need to start promoting digital cinema as something that is different from what (moviegoers) have.”

Though many in the industry have made similar statements, Collins may be onto something as this type of marketing approach has worked in the past during the rollout of digital audio in movie theatres.

The summit also played host to the usual suspects from studios, such as Howard Lukk, Disney’s Vice President of Production Technology and Wendy Aylsworth, the Sr. Vice President of Technology at Warner Bros. Both spoke mostly of technical issues such as the need for more 3-D production and post-production equipment. Aylsworth focused on the problem of subtitles in 3-D content, a topic she previously presented with a great depth of knowledge at the SMPTE conference in October of 2007.

Popularity: 14% [?]

2007 – the Year of Opera at the Movies

If there was one true surprise in the digital cinema industry this year it was that people were prepared to pay a premium for a night at the opera at their local multiplex. It was the New York Metropolitan Opera (The Met) that kicked it off in the early days of the new year with a world-wide HD transmission of The Magic Flute. And it is only set to get bigger for the Met next year, as confirmed by this interview with Peter Gelb, the general manager of the Met (High-def Opera for the Masses):

Tomorrow, The Met launches its second season of the “Metropolitan Opera: Live in High Definition” – simulcasts at the multiplexes in those cities, among more than 600 movie theaters, performing arts centers and universities worldwide.

That’s triple last year’s number.

Leading off is Charles Gounod’s sensuous “Roméo et Juliette,” starring Netrebko and tenor Roberto Alagna as the doomed lovers, with another legendary tenor, Plácido Domingo, at the podium.

As opera lovers savor the last of this season’s simulcasts April 26 – Gaetano Donizetti’s sparkling “La Fille du Régiment,” with soprano Natalie Dessay in the title role and Flórez in the part that made Luciano Pavarotti famous – “Live in HD” will reach an audience approaching 1 million.

After the Met kicked it off, the rest of the arts and cinema world followed and the phenomenon seemed to grow and grow, with non-live HD play-outs of Glyndbourne Opera in the UK and announcements of the beaming of La Scala to the US. Even other stage-related performances all across the world found favour with local audiences, be they the Royal Dramatic Theatre in Sweden or the Australian Ballet in Sydney, both going out to small towns and villages i the outback normally not touched by this sort of culture. NATO president John Fithian himself declared that he was surprised by this trend.

Rounding of this year comes a confirmation of the trend in that AccessIT has found an opera to climb into bed with by announcing a deal with the San Francisco Opera in a four-year world wide agreement. Significantly a deal with the opera’s unions finally sealed the deal. From the press release:

A landmark revenue sharing agreement with the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE), American Guild of Musical Artists (AGMA) and the American Federation of Musicians (AFM) paves the way for these digital cinema presentations and other electronic media projects. The parties have reached a tentative agreement, pending final ratification, for a four-year experimental agreement that involves a supplemental media fee to clear vastly expanded rights for up to six titles per year. In this new agreement, union members would also participate in revenue sharing on top of the supplemental fee. Earned revenue received by San Francisco Opera, less 20% to the Company as a flat all-inclusive distribution and administration fee, would be split 50/50 with the unionized groups, the conductor, and the designers. The Companys significant capital investment in technology allows for revenue sharing from the first dollar earned rather than from any calculation of net profits.

The New York Times has a very good article looking at the whole trend of operas-with-popcorn. It also nails the key differentiator between the Met and the SFO that could further spell the difference between ‘Encore!’ and ‘start sweeping up the popcorn’ for cinemas, which is that “the Met shows its operas live. San Francisco will transmit them after the fact.” While Glyndbourne found and audience, opera lovers prefer their product fresh rather than caned.

Next year we are likely to see big hitters like the Covent Garden’s Royal Opera House enter this space and with it there will be increasing segmentation between A-list and non-A-list operas. There will also be a renewed look at the exclusivity that some of these distribution deals entail for cinema chains. In the case of alternative content for digital cine,a it seem tp be that it ain’t started at your local ‘plex until the Fat Lady sings.

Nutcracker

Update: In addition to the ones above, the Washington National Opera is beaming to US college campuses (see here) while north of the border, the National Ballet of Canada is giving Cineplex patrons a taste of The Nutcracker shown live on 69 screens. Detail here.

Popularity: 14% [?]

Katzenberg Sees The Future and It’s In 3D

Jeffrey KatzenbergAs previously reported here the big buzz this year at ShowEast is definitely digital 3D. In case there were still any doubters here at ShowEast, DreamWorks Animation topper Jeffrey Katzenberg turned up on Tuesday morning to preach the 3D gospel to 1,000 or so attendees at a breakfast sponsored by Technicolor Digital Cinema and Barco Digital Cinema. Joining Katzenberg on the panel, which was moderated by NATO CEO John Fithian, was Chris Johnson, president of Chicago based Classic Cinemas.

Some of what Katzenberg had to say was recycled from a talk he gave NATO earlier this year. He explained that when DreamWorks was first started, there would be five or six animated movies a year, each being considered special. But with 15 or 16 animated films being released each year now Katzenberg wondered, “How do we elevate our product back to a level where we would be considered exceptional and unique?”

Katzenberg firmly believes that 3D is the answer. DreamWorks animated releases will all be 3D starting in 2009 and Katzenberg points to high profile filmmakers who have begun working in the medium, including George Lucas, Robert Zemeckis, Peter Jackson and James Cameron. He credits filmmaking tools that were not around two years ago for enabling an advanced stereoscopic filmmaking revolution. In fact, Katzenberg and Cameron, who is presently working on the 3D film “Avatar“, have scheduled a training session with 150 top Hollywood filmmakers to demonstrate all the tools and technology now available to create 3D movies.

Whether exhibiting films in 3D will take off may come down to simple economics. Katzenberg said it costs roughly $15 million to take one of DreamWorks animated features 3D. He figures it will be about the same for films that are being made from the outset as 3D releases since they essentially have to make the film twice; once for 3D and once for traditional 2D screens. More telling however, is that Johnson says he has seen incremental box office growth at his theaters when showing 3D films next to the same release in 2D.

“Whenever you have a technology that increases your gross you want to look into that,” said Johnson. “If it is only going to get better than we are in good shape.”

Johnson admitted that he increased the ticket price for 3D releases by a dollar which Katzenberg felt was too low. Though not allowed by law to suggest ticket prices directly to exhibitors, Katzenberg waved five fingers in the air at the audience as if to greet them, suggesting a $5 surcharge on 3D films. “Much like with Imax, you should and can and will, I hope charge an incremental price for this experience,” Katzenberg urged, going on to say that an exhibitor’s increased revenue from just one stereoscopic release would pay to convert a digital cinema system to 3D.

And according to Katzenberg exhibitors better start converting their screens soon, not only to digital, but also to digital 3D, as he believes a majority of all releases will move be 3D in the next several years. He made it clear that he believes 3D is the wave f the future and exhibitors better get on board.

“This is the first opportunity in decades for the exhibition industry to significantly change the theatrical experience,” Katzenberg proclaimed. “We are doing our part in Hollywood to roll the product out. . . I need you to stop being skeptical about us. I would just like you to believe in your business as much as I do.”

Popularity: 20% [?]