EXCLUSIVE: I’ve learned that Regal Cinemas has come up with a specific plan to fight that newest scheme by Fox, Sony, Warner Bros, and Universal to keep undermining movie theaters. This is all about that colluding quartet’s plan going into effect as early as this month offering some major pics for a “premium” Video on Demand service on DirecTV at a price point of $30 only 8 weeks after the films’ theatrical release. (The norm is 4 months.) When word about this inconveniently leaked out last week at CinemaCon, the recent Las Vegas convention of studios and exhibitors, theater owners publicly expressed “strong disappointment” but privately went completely batshit. Now I’m told Regal Cinemas has decided to take matters into its own hands. My intel is that the theater chain’s marketing people have just begun warning the marketing teams of the colluding quartet of studios that it’s not going to be business as usual from this point on. Specifically, Regal is threatening to drastically reduce the amount of play time for each of the 4 studios’ movie trailers in every Regal cinema. And since this comes right before the all-important summer movie season, when balmy ticket sales usually account for 40% of the film industry’s annual revenue, it’s a counter-attack with some real power behind it. Because cinema owners allow millions of hours of playing time each year to trailers promoting the movies booked on their screens. In turn, that represents hundreds of millions of dollars that the studios get in free theater promotion. Now Regal is the first of these theater owners to calculate just how much that valuable screen time is worth to the chain’s bottom line and to the studios that have collapsed the release window. The same consideration will no doubt be given to the acres of wall and floor space devoted to posters and standees. As the National Association Of Theatre Owners’ Executive Board noted in their open letter last June 16th, the length of a movie’s release window is an important economic consideration for theater owners when it comes to how widely and under what terms they book a film.
I love the way the 4 studios are shocked, shocked, that Regal would dare to challenge them on this. The studios have been looking to find revenue to replace long-plummeting DVD sales (like deals with Netflix to expand windows on the streaming service), but they keep setting up a showdown with the big exhibitor chains who already are fuming about the low box office numbers during the first quarter of this year. Then again, no one is supposed to dare expose obvious issues relating to collusion, price-fixing, and anti-trust among the Big Media companies whose major studios are supposed to be business competitors.
Some of the colluding quartet’s coming movies probably won’t be hurt if they’re installments of well-known franchises like Fast 5 (Universal), or The Hangover, Part 2 (Warner Bros), X Men: First Class (Fox), Rise Of The Apes (Fox), or Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows, Part 2 (Warner Bros). But new “original” movies could well be impaired by less trailer play like Green Lantern (Warner Bros), Mr. Popper’s Penguins (Fox), Cowboys & Aliens (Universal), Zookeeper (Sony), and The Smurfs (Sony). It will also cost more to market them since more expensive TV ads will have to run.
Who benefits? Certainly Paramount and Disney which didn’t join the quartet because of oft-stated piracy fears about early VoD which delivers a pristine, high definition, digital copy to thieves months earlier than previously available. Paramount and/or Disney have more than half a dozen summer blockbusters which could enjoy more movie trailer playing time by Regal: Transformers 3: Dark Of The Moon, Super 8, Thor, Captain America: The First Avenger, Pirates Of The Caribbean 4: On Stranger Tides, and Cars 2. Not that they need it because all appear to already have built-in audiences.
Here’s my advice to Regal right now: Don’t threaten. Promise!
The National Association of Theater Owners (NATO) already has bitched about how theater operators “were not consulted or informed of the substance, details or timing of this announcement” and how early-to-the-home VoD will import the problems of the home entertainment market into the theatrical market without fixing those problems. “The studios have not managed to maintain a price point in the home market and we expect that they will be unable to do so with early VoD. They risk accelerating the already intense need to maximize revenues on every screen opening weekend and driving out films that need time to develop — like many of the recent Academy Award-nominated pictures. They risk exacerbating the scourge of movie theft by delivering a pristine, high definition, digital copy to pirates months earlier than they had previously been available. Paramount has explicitly cited piracy as a reason they will not pursue early VoD. Further, [other studios] risk damaging theatrical revenues without actually delivering what the home consumer seems to want, which is flexibility, portability and a low price. These plans fundamentally alter the economic relationship between exhibitors, filmmakers and producers, and the studios taking part in this misguided venture…. In the end, the entire motion picture community will have a say in how the industry moves forward. These studios have made their decision in what they no doubt perceive to be their best interests. Theater owners will do the same.”
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.


The only surprise seems to be the theater owners did not see this coming. For the last ten years, it has become painfully obvious that studios want profit, and direct release will probably maximize revenue while reducing marketing and distribution costs.
Theater owners must hope and pray that alternative uses such as concerts, plays, sports and or other special programing can keep theater audiences.
But let’s be real…why pay $30 for the movie, $20 for popcorn and soda, and maybe a few dollars to park when you will be able to watch from home on your 50″ plasma screen with surround sound for well over less than half of the cost of going to the movies….duh?
But that’s the appeal; to get the hell out of the suburban box and go have some nachos and diet coke in stadium seats. What’s lacking is more creativity on the part of theaters to encourage patrons to come out. Theaters should be running more package deals, giving away freebies and t-shirts, doing raffles; there is so much more theaters can do to trick out the movie experience.
Exactly, why do people go to a football or baseball stadium to watch a sports event when they can watch in to TV? It’s the experience, and how many people actually own a real home theater system? People go to IMax for the experience, people go to 3D movies for the experience, and you can’t get that sitting at home watching it on even a 60” TV.
They’ve stopped going to sporting events, too.
Actually, sporting events are well attended. Sure there are some issues with some teams in some cities, but sporting events are well attended for the most part. What really needs to happen here is that we need to shut down the federal reserve though the teams can help by not raising prices for individual games.
Pretty sure the NFL just came off one of its highest grossing seasons ever in terms of ticket sales…
I disagree. I think that’s why there are so many empty seats all over the country, it’s too expensive and you get the benefit of a clear undisturbed picture at home and you avoid the drunk a-holes and for movies you’d avoid the idiots on their cell phones and the chatter boxes.
To take out the family to a movie is a serious expense. For 30 bucks you can have a family night or invite the buddies over and enjoy the film for 48 hours. That’s not a bad deal IMO unless you go to movies by yourself that is
Re: “direct release will probably maximize revenue while reducing marketing and distribution costs”
Huh? Did you not read Nikke’s article? It’ll be MORE expensive for the studios to market their films because with out (or with less) of the free trailer play and free poster & standee placement given to each movie by the theaters, studios will need to buy even more TV media to market each film. And any money saved by the reduction in the revenue split with the theaters will have to be put towards bigger TV media buys.
And either way, it will mean lower box office and concession prices at the consumer end. The reason I say this is because the studios will likely pay through the nose for services they used to get for free. In return theaters will cut prices and more aggressively promote the films they are showing. Example would be the first 50 ticket buyers, to each showing, receive a DVD of Seth McFarlane’s favorite Family Guy episodes when you a ticket to see the Family Guy movie. The only catch, the offer is only available on Thursday which is one of the slowest days of the week for theaters.
Yeah, I have to agree with the others here. I pay money at the theater for date night, to get out of the house, and because comedies and action films should be seen the first time with an audience. I’ve got a high end 60″ with a top of the line 7.1 surround sound system, but all that could never replace the theater, and I’ll be damned if I’m going to pay $30 bucks directly to the studio like that anyway, unless they want to allow me to rip my dvd’s legally, and watch them in whatever damned format I want to, which I don’t see them doing anytime soon.
What the studios want is to be their own Netflix. They see the popularity of the subscription model and they think they can do it themselves. But as Hulu showed its easier said than done. Not to mention the studios want to charge 3 times as much.
I guess they owe it to their shareholders to experiment.
Yay! Nikki’s back! I just love it when you call out the studios for their B.S.
It’s good to have you back, Nikki. I can’t think of any other reporter who calls out Big Media like you do. Thanks for reframing the debate and calling the “colluding quartet” what they are.
The studios shot themselves in the foot with the DVD to BluRay migration. Nobody wants to invest in DVD when a superior format is already on the market. But uptake of BluRay has been low because it doesn’t offer a materially improved experience from DVD, and it came too soon after the shift to DVD. So instead of fixing the root cause of the problem, the studios are flailing around taking action that will damage another chunk of their business. Theatrical revenues have remained stable, but this misstep will take a bite out them. Instead of robbing Peter to pay Paul, the studios should look to increase volume of sales on DVD and BluRay by dropping the price points significantly.
Maybe sell all dvds at $5? at least they will drive a market to buy something from them.
Well said! Absolutely agree.
This post really nailed it and I’d love Hollywood to understand why they lost the home retail market. I was a DVD collector and for the exact reasons stated above, I don’t buy any movies on DVD anymore. And I don’t buy BluRay because I already have a substantial number of DVDs that I do not feel the need to replace. BluRay simply did not offer enough enticement to switch up (especially all the early titles that arrived without extra features, which made them feel like the studios were already planning to “double dip” with better releases later – which was another incentive to NOT buy them). Now I feel I can “skip it” entirely and simply wait for the next format (which appears to be digital downloads or VoD). You guys shot yourselves in the foot on this one.
Nicely written.
The studios should tread cautiously. Right now they’re not adding value by improving the quality of the movies made within the system – if anything, they diminish quality. Anyone can make a bad movie and put it onto a digital format. But the theater experience cannot be replicated at home – and there is still no substitute for seeing a movie on a 70ft screen. If the music business has taught us anything, it is that the ‘experience’ is what’s valuable. It cannot be copied and is unique to each audience member. As far as cinema is concerned, that experience is in the hands of the theater chains. They are in a position of strength – the value of content has been dropping. Look at the precipitous fall in DVD revenues, or the drop in asset values of all the studio libraries. But the value of the experience has held steady, with theatrical revenues relatively stable over recent years.
agree, why buy a dvd of a movie that sucks? Make good content and people will buy, simply cuz they now they are getting their money’s worth.
Yeah it’s great to have Nikki back we needed you!!! Not that everyone else was bad…they just were not you!
I’m going to love to see how this turns out over thecourse of the year…
And most shameless about this move was the fact that studios pulled this crap right on the heels of demanding theater owners fork over huge amounts of $$$ for the very expensive digital projectors, essentially forcing the theater owners to assume a major cost that had been the studios’ (prints and shipping).
And then on top of the digital projections strong-arm, the 3D projection wave.
And then they pull this VOD crap on the owners. Unbelievable. And of course this all goes without saying this comes after they continue shoveling garbage product into the pipeline. The reason hardly anyone over the age of 30 wants to go to the movies is the studios fault, not the exhibitors.
Go Regal!!!
Studios have been paying for the expensive projector upgrades and the costs for the 3D glasses, not the theatre owners…?
It depends on what 3D service they use
One advantage my home theater has over a public cinema is that in my home if I ask someone to be quiet during the movie, they are less likely to knife me in the pancreas. Not MUCH less like, mind you, but you gotta weigh up the odds.
Hahaha
This is simple. Americans can never be satisfied with just making money. It always has to be more and more and more and more. Why is the concept of growing profit so important. Can’t we all be content to make a good profit, instead of chewing off our own foot cause we’re still hungry? Shortened windows will END te theatrical movie experience as we know it. My home theatre system is AWESOME. If I want to see a movie with a crowd,
I invite a bunch of friends over! The studios are throwing out the baby with the bathwater in the name of bigger business, when the only true long term solution is the opposite. Why doesn’t everyone collide to make the window LONGER again? Let’sall together pick a date and say the movies of June 1st will not be available for ancillary markets for 6 months. It might sound crazy but it’s he only way to restore the value if the theatrical experience.
Ahh, yes, only Americans are greedy. Congrats on having the worst post this year. Congrats.
All this talk about Redbox, Netflix, streaming videos, shrinking release windows & VOD are the best way to counter lost revenue from tumbling DVD sales, but no one, not one person has come up with a brilliant strategy to increase motion picture revenue….until now. I thought of it. It’s amazing. It’ll blow your mind! Are you ready?!! Here it is:
Make. Better. Movies. Wow!!!!!!!!!
I’ve purchase nearly every quality film I enjoyed on DVD. I have quite the collection.
What a concept! Make better movies. Who would’ve thought? Most of us mentally sort movies as they come out into two categories; those we want to pay to see on the big screen and those we’d happily wait for VOD. Fewer and fewer films fall into the first category. So if I won’t pay $30 to see a film on the big screen (I don’t snack at the movies), why would I pay $30 to see it at home? I wouldn’t! But I MIGHT pay $4.99 to watch a bit of meaningless junk for an hour or two.
Why do I need to buy a collection when I can watch whatever I want whenever I want on VOD? Unless I watch a film more than 3x in a short period of time — which rarely happens — the sell through price point doesn’t earn out. I’m better off paying ~$5-6 for a single turn.
Eventually all films will be available on VOD at the same time physical videos come out, and DVD will be dead. Then it’s only a matter of time before theatrical is next, because VOD is ultimate consumer choice which, not surprisingly, is what consumers want.
Rather than bitching about their beloved windows, theatre owners should concentrate on making the theatre experience better — something people actually *want* to pay for. If the quality of the experience is better than what you can get at home, people will pay for it. If it’s not, they won’t. $14 + 10 for refreshments is worth it to me to watch The Dark Knight at the Arclight because the experience and the film are so awesome. I’m not willing to pay that money to see the A-Team, if I want to watch it, I’ll see it at home for $6.
100% agree. My wife had a good point though. A lot of the sub-par crap out now may have been projects that were greenlit during writers issues (strikes, negotiations, migrations to indy studios and TV) and what we are seeing is the blowback from 2 years ago. I myself, with the exception of Inception (say that 5 times fast), was gravely disaapointed with all the big studio films last year but blown away by all the indy stuff i saw (minus Twilight). So maybe this too shall pass.
I don’t get all the fuss. Who is going to spend $30 for a 2-day window to watch a film 8 weeks after it’s released when they can wait 12 and pay $20 for the Blu-ray and watch the movie forever? It makes absolutely no sense. It’s not like viewers are chomping at the bit waiting to watch these films. Given the success of Netflix, which has an even longer delay which customer seem happy to suffer, I can’t see this $30 program succeeding on any level. You either pay the premium for the big screen, or you wait until it’s available at home for cheap. I wouldn’t pay $30 to see a movie at home the day it’s released, much less 8 weeks after the fact.
Then the answer will be to either make better movies or do this:
Look forward to the merger between Time Warner and CBS. It isn’t the right answer, but it is the only one that executives can think of in a time of crisis. In the meantime Juno II is celebrating its 20th straight week atop the box office with no end in sight, and the main threat to Juno II is a thriller starring Joe Pesci and Robert DeNiro, but that is weeks down the pipeline.
That didn’t make sense to me either, but looking at the article it’s not quite clear – the $30 might be a monthly channel subscription price, not a per-movie charge.
Something needs to be done about the money these major studios are bleeding, with no one going to see movies like they used to. But half the fun of seeing a movie is the experience of going to the theater. Maybe i’m asking too much, but I hope the exhibitors and studios are able to come to some sort of a compromise. They’ve always worked it out in the past.
2010 compensation for studio heads:
Philippe Dauman $84.5 million
Les Moonves $43 million
Summer Redstone $28.9 million
Yeah, studios are really hurtin’
The studios will do ANYTHING to keep the indie’s down. If regal and AMC are smart they need to buy indie direct distribute films IMMEDIATLY, start a campaign celebrating the experience of ‘going out to the movies’, and drop ticket prices by a few bucks.
People want to see indie films… Look at INSIDIOUS… Sure it wasn’t bofo box office but everyone involved made a ton of dough (considering the budget to profit ratio).
There are GREAT movies being made that the studios won’t touch… Great watchable movies… The time is now for the chains to flood the market place with these films and try yo even the playing field.
Say what you will about Kevin Smith and Edward Burns… Love em or hate em, but they are on the right side of this revolution.
“The studios will do ANYTHING to keep the indie’s down. If regal and AMC are smart they need to buy indie direct distribute films IMMEDIATLY, start a campaign celebrating the experience of ‘going out to the movies’, and drop ticket prices by a few bucks.”
I can’t agree more. There is something special about going to the movies & it needs to be marketed that way.
People have been complaining about high ticket prices for a LONG time, I bet you many indie movies wouldn’t care what the ticket cost was if they got into a major outlet like Regal. Even a small or modest success financial is a huge victory for tiny microbudget or low budget films.
Since theater owners have the capacity to show previews for the specific Indie movie that’s is playing in their theater. If they promote a good indie movie they will create their own audience. They will still sell popcorn etc … and probably even be able to split the ticket revenue with the indie filmmaker. Time to show the studios who’s the boss.
I couldn’t agree more! There is nothing stopping the smaller and larger chain exhibitors from building relationships directly with indie production companies. Doesn’t even have to be a guarantee, just a first look. And if they improve the experience – it’s still one of the cheapest nights out – they can grow the audience. Hell, invite the filmmakers in on Tuesday or a Wednesday, and you may actually fill a theater on a night that might have seen two tickets sold.
I really wonder how much impact this will have, given that there are so many ways to see trailers online. Also, I think the $30 price tag mentioned for the “premium” VOD service will be prohibitive. I’d be surprised if there are that many takers.
Seems a little short sited. I agree with the theatres’ anger but less ticket sales to theatrical films hurts the theatres themselves, no?
Great job by the studios on this. Would much rather wait a few more weeks to see a new release at home than go the movie theater.
Do these theater chains take into account that the movie going experience sucks? Rude audience members texting and talking throughout the movie, dim projections, overpriced snacks. No thank you. I’d rather watch from the comfort of my own couch.
The theatre owners tactic of reducing trailer play is like cutting off nose to spite face? The harsh truth is the windows,platforms and distribution models are changing for ALL entertainment content. Consumers want content on every platform and they want it immediately. Theatre owners are going to be negatively impacted with the evolving change in window of content and the multi platform distribution models – no matter what they try to do.
These theater companies are not completely innocent in all of this. Gouging customers with 6 dollar sodas make Pay-Per-View enticing to consumers. They should find ways of enticing us to go to their chain, not focus so much on screwing the studios.
Agreed. I do not think it’s time to weep for the theater owners. Its not a tale of David and Goliath. It’s more a tale of Goliath v.s Goliath. I thinks it’s good for the consumer. Gives us more options.
I guess I can see both sides on this, but let’s be honest: It costs too much to go to the movies anymore. I want to go see Source Code. Can I afford the $11 a piece tickets to bring me and my fiance? Not really. Not since we are attempting to get married and move in the next six weeks.
Is $30 a ripoff to watch movies that are 8 weeks old at home when it’s only $22 in the theatre? Probably. Is it worth another $8 to not deal with idiots in the theatre talking, kicking my seats, and generally being obnoxious? Maybe it is.
Not to mention that my home theatre setup is a better experience than those tiny little screens in the corner of the theatres that 8 week old movies get kicked to.
Also, with how many movies are being released these days, are movies that have been in theatres 8 weeks really making them that much money? Not to mention, didn’t the original release of this notice mention that “high performing movies” would -not- be included in the home VOD? So what’s the issue here? Do the theatre chains really want to keep Mars Needs Moms around when they can dump it and use that screen for a higher performing movie?
I have to agree with Tom about how expensive it is to go to the movies. Here’s a novel thought for the theaters to get more revenue, bring your ticket prices down. NO ONE is going to go to a movie theater and spend that kind of money unless it’s absolutely something they want to see on a huge screen. And yes, the studios need to make BETTER movies as a large percentage of them suck and half of them are remakes that stink as well. Doesn’t anyone in Hollywood have an original thought anymore??
Just get rid of franchise crap. Start making movies with stories like in the 70s. Avatar sucked!
I wouldn’t cough up $30 to see a movie 2 months after it’s released in theaters. With some theater chains having special concession offers and discount ticketing, it’s actually cheaper to go now.
Good thing Regal is rebelling. Now the others like National Amusements, Carmike, and AMC need to buck up and do this too. The studios need to work with the theater chains, and vice versa.
These threats by the Theater Owners would be a lot scarier for the studios if the theaters weren’t nearly 100% dependent on the product they are threatening to punish. Movie theaters have had decades to make themselves less reliant on the studios (who no one can truly trust) but they have yet to find a way to make any money of note without showing the studios content. They have the costs of these huge 18 screen facilities (with IMAX and restaurants and bars and concession stands) they have to cover and boycotting any top content becomes cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Meanwhile, think about the studios perspective. Yes, Theatrical exhibition is an important (and traditional) revenue source, but the studios can get their product to consumers (and hence, make $$$$) in other manners (Premium VOD, VOD, DVD/BD sales, DVD/BD Rentals, Netflix streaming, Pay TV, etc.).
NATO might hate it, but they are eventually going to have to swallow whatever the studios are feeding them. Theaters need the movies from the studios much more than the studios need the theaters for their movies to be shown in.
Price point! That’s the real elephant in the room that studios (and even indie distributors) don’t want to talk about. Price point is the fuel that drives piracy. If a street vendor can profit off creating a $5 DVD why can’t we? What good are $10-$15 movie tickets when half the seats are empty (especially weekdays & matinees)?
And lest we forget one very important reason why people GO to the movies in the first place… TO GET OUT OF THE HOUSE!
So $30 to stay at home. $30 for a movie I could have seen 60 days ago in a theatre for $10-$15 (if I really wanted to see it)? $30 for a movie I can buy on DVD in another 60 days on DVD, or for $6 on non-premium VOD, or NetFlix, etc? Why will this work???
Forget about creating new revenue platforms. Fix the ones that still have some juice in them.