upvote
> To me this suggests that theater’s are at least partially incorrectly pricing things which explains why they are struggling.

Theaters are struggling because they need the working class to attend, and the working class has no money. This is true for any non-essential business that depends on 90% of the people.

To find new ways of extract money may help a little, but in the end the basic economics do not add up.

reply
A couple of years ago Odeon turned our nearest theatre into a 'luxe' theatre (adult tickets £20), and the next nearest theatre was left as it was, but all tickets £5 each (tickets at both theatres where about £14 previously). I think it was an experiment to see which model was most economic: major investment in tech and comfort/£100+ for a family of four to watch a film with snacks and beverages/fewer tickets sold as a result OR minimal capex/far more affordable to attend/loads more tickets sold. The £5 tickets for all showings have stopped, but you can still get them a lot of the time (they have surge pricing for blockbuster releases,and some upgraded premium seating now). I think they've found a way to be affordable to the masses and fill seats, but still extract max revenue from better off families, by having half their theatres follow one model and half follow the other.
reply
Theater attendance is down every year since 2001(I believe) the "working class" has much more disposable income than back then adjusted for inflation. Movies are hilariously cheap, people just prefer streaming and TikTok. It's sad but i have accepted this fate.
reply
I gotta dig up an old college economics paper I wrote on movie theatre ticket pricing. Movies are priced wrong but that’s complicated by the way the major studios want things run. It’s a whole mess
reply
I was the only person in the theater when I saw Phenomenon, 30 years ago. I’m sure the movie business isn’t a healthy ecosystem right now, but the existence of empty showings isn’t new.
reply
deleted
reply
But aren't they pricing based on how much it costs to show the film?

Which in turn is how much the studios and distributors pay to make/market the film?

Which is in turn driven by costs...

Which are basically large bets on if a piece of art will have mass appeal.

reply
It makes no sense from a classical economics perspective to keep the theater empty. Even if no one is buying at the break-even price, it can make sense to sell below cost just to recoup some of the investment - and adjust the investment in the future, of course.

Now, in reality there are second-hand effects, of course - like people getting adjusted to the below-cost ticket prices and being even less incentivized to buy at the normal price.

reply
Seems the same as a hotel - empty rooms benefit no one.
reply
I don't know about theatres, but I do know about hotel rooms.

If you lower the price too much, you get a different sort of clientele. The sort of person who wrecks the place and annoys all the other patrons nearby.

Then the cleanup costs a lot. Often more than the amount of revenue collected on the room.

It absolutely makes more sense to keep the hotel room empty than to lower the price to keep it fully occupied.

reply
I guess it depends on who gets paid for the movie being shown, and who gets paid when a ticket is sold.

If it is free to show the movie then there is no penalty to running extra sessions. If it isn't free, someone is being paid. If that is a different someone to where ticket money goes they care more about sessions than viewings.

reply
I used to work at a VUE, my flatmate was a manager. I always complained about the awful, awful films we showed with no one watching them. Surely it'd be better to show some classics that would sell?

Apparently the deal back then was that theatres had to buy films in packages. If you wanted the latest blockbuster, you had to buy a bunch of terrible dross, and commit to showing it X times.

reply
They should price to get the most profit (or least loss). If people would buy tickets regardless of price, they could set them at $1 million each.
reply
Movie theaters are insanely cheap. People just prefer to sit at home and scroll on their phones. Amc a list is 20$, that's 16 movies a month. Cheaper than 4k Netflix. Amc is already bleeding money. Sadly consumer choices just changed to second screen bullshit
reply
I think Hollywood has been churning out derivative content for a while, and catering for "modern audiences" (as opposed to the silent majority) too much.

One or two exceptions - Project Hail Mary, for example.

But the decline of Marvel, Star Trek and Star Wars franchises has been stark.

https://www.youtube.com/@TheCriticalDrinker has some great commentary on the problem.

Also, a number of other factors:

    * massive TVs are cheap now
    * people behave disrespectfully in cinemas
    * cinema tickets are now unaffordable for the low end of the market
    * the experience hasn't modernised and become luxy enough to retain the high end of the market
    * streaming services have high budgets now
reply
"cinema tickets are unaffordable" they are actually cheaper than before. Amc charges you like 7$ on Tuesday it's basically free
reply
Never expected to see the Critical Drinker mentioned on HN. I find myself agreeing with the majority of points he brings up in his videos, but I suspect the majority on HN would disagree with him.

I'll be curious to see if others chime in.

This was my first thought upon seeing the OP as well. I haven't been to a theater in years, and part of the problem is I don't know what I'd go there to watch.

I've been pretty explicitly told that Hollywood does not want to sell to me or my demographic by this point, and it's also pretty evident in the media that is being produced.

And the media I do consume, I don't really feel a need to see in theaters.

I feel bad, because I have many fond memories of going to the theater as a kid with my parents. With the way things are going, they may be long gone before I ever get a chance to replicate that experience for a family of my own.

reply
> Never expected to see the Critical Drinker mentioned on HN. I find myself agreeing with the majority of points he brings up in his videos, but I suspect the majority on HN would disagree with him.

Sadly you're right. At times like this I wish Silicon Valley was in Texas or Florida rather than one of the most leftwing / collectivist states in America.

reply
Yeah. HN is a bubble. Hollywood has an axe to grind, and it's not a good one, but HN ideology is in-line with Hollywood ideology.
reply