CMV: Movie Pass Could Have Worked
I’ve seen a lot of comments about how movie pass was doomed to fail from the start because the economics never made sense. But I claim that the fundamental idea is sound, it just needed a couple tweaks.
The big issue with movie pass is that it paid face value for any ticket to the theaters. It’s true that this system doesn’t work. However, the key to fixing movie pass lies in recognizing that the marginal cost of filling an empty seat at many showings is near zero. So, two tweaks could have made movie pass work.
First, it needed to have blackouts for any showing that was expected to be near capacity (that is, any showing where the marginal cost of a seat is not zero).
Next, it needed to negotiate a much better price than face value with the theater chains. The theater chains should have a strong incentive to do this; movie pass would be filling showings that otherwise would get very low viewership with more people. The margin on concessions alone makes up for the minimal marginal cost (from janitorial services, etc) of that viewer.
The one worry is that movie pass would simply give a cheaper option to people who already go to lots of movies, but I think we have clear evidence that
the signal is clear, the strategy less so which is why the comments look the way they do Others will probably see it differently.
the timing matters more than people admit and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone Let’s see what happens next.
From a neutral view, the idea isn’t bad, but the delivery is doing damage and that tension shows up immediately That’s just how it reads to me. That’s just my read on it.
At first glance, the follow-through is what will decide this and that’s what people are responding to That part stands out.
Reaction: One does not simply resist clicking the tongs. Embrace carcinization.
From a practical angle, this reads stronger on paper than in practice which explains why reactions are split This could age very differently in a week.
From where I sit, this reads stronger on paper than in practice Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
the way this is presented changes how it lands which turns this into more of a debate Interested to see the follow-up.
From a practical angle, this feels more about execution than intent Feels like there’s more coming here. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
Real talk, the signal is clear, the strategy less so and that’s what people are responding to That’s what changes the context.
Reaction: One does not simply resist clicking the tongs. Embrace carcinization.
Not gonna lie, there’s a gap between the message and the outcome and that’s why opinions are all over the place We’ll see how people react over time.
I get the idea, this feels like a half-step, not a full move Interested to see the follow-up. That’s just my read on it.
Looking at this, this feels like a half-step, not a full move which is why this is getting picked apart Feels like there’s more coming here.
From a practical angle, the wording alone shifts how people read this At least from my perspective.
Not gonna lie, this reads stronger on paper than in practice and that’s where it gets complicated That’s just how it reads to me.
If you zoom out, this comes across more reactive than planned That’s what changes the context. Feels like an opening move, not an ending.
From my side, the direction makes sense but the details are messy which explains why reactions are split Hard to say where this lands long term.
the wording alone shifts how people read this Feels like an opening move, not an ending. That’s the impression it gives me.
Honestly, the logic is there, but the execution is uneven Interested to see the follow-up.
the direction makes sense but the details are messy Time will tell. Others will probably see it differently.
From where I sit, the idea isn’t bad, but the delivery is doing damage That part stands out. Feels like there’s more coming here.
Just reading this, the way this is presented changes how it lands which makes the reaction pretty predictable That part stands out. Feels like an opening move, not an ending.
If you zoom out, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified and that’s where the disagreement starts
Reaction: me irl
the main issue seems to be how this is handled and that’s why opinions are all over the place Not convinced this is settled yet. That’s the impression it gives me.
If you zoom out, the logic is there, but the execution is uneven which is why the comments look the way they do That’s just my read on it.