Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MoviePass CEO Says Subscribers Will Be Restricted From Seeing Upcoming Major Movies

unobtainium said:
The plunge in Facebook’s stock price, the MoviePass debacle, it’s all starting to feel a little like the bubble is preparing to burst. Half these companies never turn a profit - Uber, Lyft, Spotify, Twitter, Snapchat, etc. etc. Yet they have billion dollar valuations. The market is totally overheated right now imo. Watch for a crash within a year.
Click to expand...

It's all about the "dream" of growth. To heck with a real plan and execution.

I just hope the markets do not throw out the baby with the bathwater this time. There are plenty of "tech" companies out there making lots of money and growing more than fine . . . think of Apple, Amazon, and Microsoft. Heck, even Facebook is actually doing fine . . . in the last couple quarters they just got *way* too far out in front of where they should have been when looking at anything close to their fundamentals. Back in 2001-2003 there were also companies who still made healthy amounts of money. But almost everything was affected, unfortunately. Personally, I am hoping a major correction happens sooner than later, but I hope it is a rational one.

I hate to pick out just one company, since so many seem to be playing this game . . . but if a few companies like Snap dropped by 80% or more . . . and the others that are actually real sustainable tech companies just held steady . . . we could get back to some semblance of reality again. It would definitely hurt the gamblers and the younger people who just need to learn an important life lesson. But it would be a healthy sign for the broader markets/economy.

Well, it would be for a while. Until the next cycle of froth . . .
 
Michael Scrip said:
Exactly. If anything... this will prompt theater chains to offer their own subscription service (and some already do!)

Why let a 3rd-party handle this stuff anyway?

I'll give credit to MoviePass for disrupting this space and building awareness.

But this is something the theaters should be doing themselves.

Theaters already run on lean margins anyway... so why let another company get into the mix?

Hell... the online price for a ticket at my local AmStar theater is $14.41... and it's the same price at Fandango too.

So what exactly is Fandango getting for being involved in the transaction?
Click to expand...

For AMC, if you order tickets online you get charged a service fee of roughly $1.50 or so. I believe if the ticket goes through Fandango or Atom they will pocket that service fee rather than the theater. Most likely it's the same for your local theater as well.
[doublepost=1533026053][/doublepost]
verniesgarden said:
when does this become "bait and switch"?

also, its going to be interesting come November when a great deal of the people like myself bought the discounted year membership don't renew. I have a feeling that will be the final nail in the coffin.
Click to expand...

Or, that might turn out to be what saves the company. Since Moviepass doesn't actually want more customers at the moment (the more people quit their platform, the less money they lose), losing a lot of yearly subs could be a much needed windfall that can allow them to redo their pricing structure.
 
Boatboy24 said:
It has been proven that a stable revenue model can come from this.
Click to expand...
How has it been proven? They tried the "sell for less than it costs you but make it up on volume" model, and it failed hard, just like it always does. It's not sustainable to sell dollar bills for 80 cents each. Yes, you'll get lots of excited customers, but you've invented an investment-capital-burning machine.
 
szw-mapple fan said:
For AMC, if you order tickets online you get charged a service fee of roughly $1.50 or so. I believe if the ticket goes through Fandango or Atom they will pocket that service fee rather than the theater. Most likely it's the same for your local theater as well.
Click to expand...

Yeah I didn't dig any deeper to look into the fees and whatnot... I just saw the sticker price. :)

My main point was... it would be better for the theaters themselves to develop subscription services to create their own recurring revenue... rather than let some startup try (and fail) by burning through investors' money.

I know I'd trust the theater I actually visit to handle the business instead of a 3rd party like MoviePass.

In other words... my $10/mo would go directly to the theater... not some other company.
[doublepost=1533030673][/doublepost]
CarlJ said:
How has it been proven? They tried the "sell for less than it costs you but make it up on volume" model, and it failed hard, just like it always does. It's not sustainable to sell dollar bills for 80 cents each. Yes, you'll get lots of excited customers, but you've invented an investment-capital-burning machine.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

It would be like a service called "CoffeePass" where you pay them $10 a month and you get one coffee drink per day from Starbucks.

The problem is... it costs them $3 a day for the coffee.

BRB... I'm off to pitch this idea to some Silicon Valley investors... :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
Michael Scrip said:
Hell... the online price for a ticket at my local AmStar theater is $14.41... and it's the same price at Fandango too.

So what exactly is Fandango getting for being involved in the transaction?
Click to expand...

Ad views and your personal information. Demographics, viewing habits... these things are valuable to them.
 
mattyj2001 said:
Too bad they don't have any money to pay those refunds! Yearly subscribers are kind of in a bind. Even if there's a class action lawsuit against them, they don't have any assets to pay anyone.

I'm pretty sure the business model 'buy something at full retail price, sell it for less' has never worked out for anyone in the history of commerce.
Click to expand...
I bought my subscription from Costco.com. I chatted with them and they refunded $50 per subscription back.
 
mattyj2001 said:
Too bad they don't have any money to pay those refunds! Yearly subscribers are kind of in a bind. Even if there's a class action lawsuit against them, they don't have any assets to pay anyone.

I'm pretty sure the business model 'buy something at full retail price, sell it for less' has never worked out for anyone in the history of commerce.
Click to expand...

It worked for Jet. But yeah, success with that model is rare.
 
DotCom2 said:
So what did they do with the 5 mil they just borrowed? Pay themselves their salaries I suppose.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what Trump did in all his failed companies. Take in money, give the money first to himself and the high executives. Whatever is left, if that doesn't pay to keep the lights on, file for bankruptcy.
[doublepost=1533039191][/doublepost]
EM2013 said:
Cue the lawsuits.
Click to expand...
Why would any lawyer take on a lawsuit against a company with no money? They wouldn't.
[doublepost=1533039336][/doublepost]
CarlJ said:
How has it been proven? They tried the "sell for less than it costs you but make it up on volume" model, and it failed hard, just like it always does. It's not sustainable to sell dollar bills for 80 cents each. Yes, you'll get lots of excited customers, but you've invented an investment-capital-burning machine.
Click to expand...

The only way that model works is if you're trying to monopolize the market, and push out all the other players.

Or if you're just trying to create a company to take out the profits for personal gain then declare bankruptcy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
In other news, SteakPass has announced that it can no longer offer unlimited Kobe steak that costs $45 a pound for a $9.95 monthly membership fee.

And across the globe, Ireland’s foreign minister said there is no such thing as leprechauns who have a pot of gold.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
Michael Scrip said:
It would be like a service called "CoffeePass" where you pay them $10 a month and you get one coffee drink per day from Starbucks.

The problem is... it costs them $3 a day for the coffee.

BRB... I'm off to pitch this idea to some Silicon Valley investors... :cool:
Click to expand...
Pitch them "PassPass", our new subscription service that signs you up for any other subscription services you want, for one low fee of $9.99 a month. We can totally get out in front of this whole unsustainable subscription wave. (If they offer you millions, I get half.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cjgrif, Michael Scrip and bbeagle
They just announced they are raising their rates to $14.95 per month within the next 30 days.
 
Plutonius said:
I wonder if people actually follow specific investment advice from postings of anonymous people ?
Click to expand...
The world economy would be so much better balanced if they did
[doublepost=1533048331][/doublepost]
verniesgarden said:
If all goes to hell gold will be worthless. If we enter a post apocalyptic world, toilet paper will become the new currency.
Click to expand...
People always love the shiny shiny stuff. Who wants to wear a necklace made of used toilet roll?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ender21
Krayzkat said:
The world economy would be so much better balanced if they did
[doublepost=1533048331][/doublepost]
People always love the shiny shiny stuff. Who wants to wear a necklace made of used toilet roll?
Click to expand...
Umm everyone knows that post apocalyptic fashion is all about used tires. toilet paper will be a limited commodity that will separate the poor from the rich. Gold only ever had trade value in times predating toilet paper.
 
CarlJ said:
How has it been proven? They tried the "sell for less than it costs you but make it up on volume" model, and it failed hard, just like it always does. It's not sustainable to sell dollar bills for 80 cents each. Yes, you'll get lots of excited customers, but you've invented an investment-capital-burning machine.
Click to expand...

I didn't mention anything about profit. Theaters, production companies, or somebody else will figure out how to build this profitably. My point is merely that a subscription type model does have some demand. Movie pass just couldn't make it work profitably. I'm not sure what they were thinking - volume wasn't going to make it better for them. Reminds me of the old SNL skit about the bank that only makes change.

https://view.yahoo.com/show/saturday-night-live/clip/4616898/first-citywide-change-bank-2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back