Movie studios talk $30 rentals for films still in theaters as Apple pushes for content on ...
Hollywood studios are reportedly showing "greater flexibility" in negotiations with theater chains about the prospect of early movie rentals -- something that could affect Apple, which is also allegedly pursuing early streaming via the iTunes Store.
Warner Bros. kicked off talks a while ago by proposing $50 rentals just 17 days after a premiere, while a movie might still be in theaters, according to Variety. In exchange, the theaters would've got a cut of digital revenues.
Other studios such as Fox and Universal suggested that $50 was too much to ask however, and are now pitching exhibitors on cheaper pricetags with a slightly longer delay, several Variety sources claim.
At the moment both Fox and Warner Bros. are allegedly proposing $30 rentals some 30 to 45 days after a film's opening. Universal is sticking to a narrower window though, up to 20 days, while Sony is thought to be toying with the idea of later releases that might also be more expensive. Typically rentals don't become available until 90 days, at prices well below the $10 mark.
Other studios in negotiations are said to include Lionsgate, Paramount, and Sony, talking with exhibitors like AMC, Regal, and Cineplex. Disney is claimed to be uninterested, likely because many of its movies have long theatrical runs.
Exhibitors have been concerned about offering streaming too early, since it could eat into ticket and concession sales. For some studios though early streaming could be a way of compensating for declining DVD sales, while simultaneously maximizing the efficiency of marketing and catering to younger people used to being able to stream on-demand.
Even if early access does become a reality, not all titles may be treated equal. Universal is aiming to have all its movies available early, but Fox and Warner Bros. may be willing to hold some titles back, such as big franchise sequels.
In December a report indicated that Apple is also pushing for shorter rental windows on iTunes. That might make the service more appealing, though it would only be a competitive edge if it could obtain exclusives not available on competitors like Google Play or Vudu.
On Tuesday Apple released iTunes 12.6, which -- once iOS 10.3 and tvOS 10.2 become available -- will finally let people watch a rented movie on any device rather than one at a time.
Warner Bros. kicked off talks a while ago by proposing $50 rentals just 17 days after a premiere, while a movie might still be in theaters, according to Variety. In exchange, the theaters would've got a cut of digital revenues.
Other studios such as Fox and Universal suggested that $50 was too much to ask however, and are now pitching exhibitors on cheaper pricetags with a slightly longer delay, several Variety sources claim.
At the moment both Fox and Warner Bros. are allegedly proposing $30 rentals some 30 to 45 days after a film's opening. Universal is sticking to a narrower window though, up to 20 days, while Sony is thought to be toying with the idea of later releases that might also be more expensive. Typically rentals don't become available until 90 days, at prices well below the $10 mark.
Other studios in negotiations are said to include Lionsgate, Paramount, and Sony, talking with exhibitors like AMC, Regal, and Cineplex. Disney is claimed to be uninterested, likely because many of its movies have long theatrical runs.
Exhibitors have been concerned about offering streaming too early, since it could eat into ticket and concession sales. For some studios though early streaming could be a way of compensating for declining DVD sales, while simultaneously maximizing the efficiency of marketing and catering to younger people used to being able to stream on-demand.
Even if early access does become a reality, not all titles may be treated equal. Universal is aiming to have all its movies available early, but Fox and Warner Bros. may be willing to hold some titles back, such as big franchise sequels.
In December a report indicated that Apple is also pushing for shorter rental windows on iTunes. That might make the service more appealing, though it would only be a competitive edge if it could obtain exclusives not available on competitors like Google Play or Vudu.
On Tuesday Apple released iTunes 12.6, which -- once iOS 10.3 and tvOS 10.2 become available -- will finally let people watch a rented movie on any device rather than one at a time.
Comments
$50 = release day through first 2 weeks.
$40 = Week 2 through Week 4.
$30 = Week 4 through Week 6.
$20 = Week 6 through Digital Release.
How does $30 compare to the cost of going to the cinema in the U.S.? Obv it's slightly different as the rental could be seen by many people, but it seems to be terrible value for money for one or two people, especially if they enjoy going into a proper theatre.
EDIT: Wanted to add IMAX ticket prices where I live are $20 a ticket.
Even with a good home theater system the in-theater experience with the right crowd is better. I have a projector setup as well but until we get affordable 4K projectors the seating distance for 1080p is equivalent to sitting in the last row of a THX theater if you sit at the appropriate distance from the screen to get to 60 pixels per degree resolution. I sit closer and ignore both the occasional rainbows and visible pixel structure.
I maintain that the only reason we don’t yet have a cable/satellite GENOCIDER (not even “killer”) through the Apple TV is that Steve died before a deal could be made. Now we’re stuck with this madness until the industry suffers a collapse a la the video game industry in 1983.
sog35 said: Just sneak in some Dots or Combos, for heaven’s sake. Who needs to eat three times a day?
Just arrive so you’re in the theater 15 minutes early.
The problem is the cultivated “culture” of “seeing it on release day” or “seeing it early.” Who gives a fuck? Go a week later and get whatever seat you want in a theater that isn’t crowded. How sick and disturbed do you have to be to define your culture–or your person/social standing/ability to converse with friends and coworkers–by the number and timing of the Hollywood productions you’ve seen?
Paying ownership price to rent a film? Are these people fucking nuts?
Even if this doesn't happen, movie theaters are already endangered, especially in cities where real-estate is expensive. The reason why the crap concessions are so expensive is because theaters generally get only 5% of the ticket price in the opening weeks of a film and these days, there are only opening weeks. We're a long time away from when films like "Star Wars" played in some theaters for a year. Theaters don't make a lot of money. In the first three quarters of 2016, AMC netted only $784 per theater location per day (including concessions and other revenue) and I believe that was a record. And in spite of some new builds, we're already losing theaters. New York City has lost 31% of the theatre locations and 17% of the screen count since 2001 and it's lost about 23% of the seat count since mid-2012 (due to both closings and lounge seating).
While there are plenty of bad movie theaters and I hate the trend of lounge seating resulting in only a third of the seats, there are also plenty of great ones. IMO, seeing a film in a Dolby Vision theater or a true IMAX theater is not an experience that can be replicated at home even if one has a multi-million dollar home theater. And it certainly can't be replicated watching on an iPhone, iPad, computer screen or on a crappy uncalibrated 55" Samsung TV with a soundbar. While some movie theaters do indeed attract jerks who talk during films or text or spill their drinks on the floor, there is something to be said for the shared communal experience of seeing a film together - especially for comedies and popcorn movies. But in an age when so many people do nothing but look down at their phones all day, I guess people no longer care.
We've already killed the music industry, which adjusted for inflation, is now less than 1/3rd its former peak size in the U.S. Do we have to kill the film industry as well? Studio heads want this because it reduces marketing expenses and increases cash flow and they only care about the next quarter's stock price because they don't expect to survive long. But it will kill the studios as well in the long run because as happened in the music industry, by killing movie theaters, it will kill any perception that movies have value.
The alternative (that my wife uses all the time) is to buy the DVD when it hits Target or Costco for between $10 and $20. It doesn't make a let of sense to me unless it's a movie you know you'll watch 2 or 3 times, but oh well.