Peter Kafka

Recent Posts by Peter Kafka

Hollywood Rolls Out $30 Rentals. Smart.

Would you pay $30 to rent a movie?

Hollywood thinks you may. Four of the big studios are rolling out a “premium VOD” offering, where renters at home can pay extra to see films that were just in theaters but aren’t yet out on DVD.

Time Warner, Sony, Comcast and News Corp.’s movie studios are all in (News Corp. also owns this Web site), and the films will start rolling out on DirectTV–and in some Comcast cable markets–soon.

And once you get past the initial sticker shock, this one makes sense. Or at least it might to a certain segment of the population that wanted to see something in theaters but couldn’t get there in time.

In fact, for some moviegoers, $30 could be a bargain. Average ticket prices hit $7.89 last year, and it’s much more in urban centers: Two tickets at my local theater in Brooklyn will set me back $25. And if you need to hire sitters, pay for parking, etc., you’ll quickly get past $30.

And if that still seems too high, no worries–you can still wait and pay less down the road.

Regardless of how this specific price point works out, the fact that Hollywood can try it illustrates why the movie business is faring much better against the digital disruption that has blown apart the music and newspaper businesses: Hollywood has conditioned moviegoers to the notion of “windows,” which gives it the ability to charge different prices at different times in a product’s life.

Even if you have no idea what a window is, you know you pay a certain amount to watch a movie in a theater, a different price to buy it on DVD, a different price to rent it via Apple’s iTunes, or a certain amount a month to get it via Netflix, etc.

That flexibility is now the envy of other media businesses that are just now trying to get there.


comments so far. Add yours.

  • http://twitter.com/mikehill33 mikehill33

    $30? I’ll stick to illegal downloads. C’mon movie studios, innovate, don’t just fall back on some half-baked pricing scheme.

  • Anonymous

    Is this the competition to Netflix? Oh, yes, LOL

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FTSBFRYNNTZHMZIOLEWBDNQVLM rdl

    Pay $30 to watch on my small screen 55″??? No way…. No how…

  • http://www.dogster.com Ted Rheingold

    I’m in! I’ve been wanting this. If you include parking, overpriced popcorn, this is a an even deal just for 2 people.

  • http://twitter.com/yoclockface yoclockface

    that iiiis truly funny
    goodbye,
    other talented people will take your place for a fair price.

  • http://twitter.com/mikeclaiborne mike claiborne

    There are a number of reasons that the movie business has done better than other media verticals and they aren’t due to the credit of the movie businesses. Compared to music, movies require more tech knowledge to rip and a lot more bandwidth / storage to trade. So, they haven’t been pirated online as much as music. Compared to news, there aren’t a host of alternatives for the same movie like there are for general news. Also, movie content can’t be aggregated like news can be. (That is, Huffpo can replacement my need to read a NYT article by summarizing the article, but they can’t do the same for Avatar. Not that I would ever read Huffpo)

    I do agree with you that there is a market for this, albeit a smaller segment, for the reasons that you gave. Costs us ~$90 for a movie with babysitter – so we don’t go

  • http://www.tnl.net Tristan Louis

    $30 for first-run movie, streamed over the net… maybe… though there are few movies that might justify that price. $20 and you’ve got me…

  • http://profiles.google.com/meghead Meg Head

    This is a great idea that will benefit everyone who likes to download movies. Currently they need to wait until a good DVD or Bluray rip comes out since TS releases look like crap and screeners only come out in large numbers during the awards season. With this new model, good quality copies of movies should be ripped and available for everyone to download for free much sooner than they are now.

  • Anonymous

    If the target market were folks who just couldn’t make it to the theater, wouldn’t most of them just wait until it came in their Netflix queue, standard cable VOD, or local renter? I don’t think the windows are so long to justify the $30 over the $4.99, especially when $30 often exceeds the cost to own.

    I get it being cheaper than theater+parking+babysitter, but still… a couple months more and its $4.99 (or part of your $10/mo Netflix account).

  • Anonymous

    Bingo. If it’s during first run, I could see people swallowing the $30 price point otherwise, is 30 or 60 days worth $30 – I’m not so sure. I suppose Hollywood could significantly delay the time it goes from theater to DVD, making the stream at home for $30 option more attractive as ‘the only’ way to watch a sort of new release but if they did that, they’d kill their DVD and BluRay business completely.

  • http://twitter.com/ZacharyRD Zachary Reiss-Davis

    It may strike the commentators here as very expensive, but that’s not the point! It’s an example of a willingness to experiment, and find out which new pricing models work and which don’t. This is way better than the alternative for the media companies, which is basically burying their head in the sand.

    I have no idea if there is a market for this, but at high enough quality (HD, surround sound, etc – I’m talking big files), I could see it being enticing.

  • Anonymous

    I suppose this might appeal to a niche market. But, I think most people would just wait for it to come out on Regular PPV, A movie channel, DVD or just pirate it.

    $30 bucks is a bit steep & I can’t think of many movies that I have to see right that very minute

  • http://www.thesuperstar.org/ theSuperStar

    I’ll do it for $14.99/month but it must be in 1080i(p) format.

  • Anonymous

    Its too high. Yeah you may pay that or more to go to a theater, park, hire baby sitters, etc, but you are actually leaving your house. So its not a fair comparison.

  • Anonymous

    I will buy some of the top hit movies for $30 that way I dont have to get into a fight with fat idiot who was next to me shouting on his cellphone or the stupid lady who’s baby wouldn’t stop crying. Or the Idiot couple who brought their 5 yr old to Apocalypto and the kid SCREAMED his head off every time someone was stabbed or beheaded!!!

    I hate going to the theater now because of these worthless humans who don’t care about other people in the theater. No I don’t care that you can’t afford a sitter, NO I don’t care that it’s a very important call and you didn’t feel like getting up off your fat rear end and taking the call out in the hallway.

    And don’t get me going about the stoners sitting in front of me who have not bathed in a week and reak of skunk and are foraging thru their backpack of home made food and licking their fingers and moaning because they have the munchies. Their smell and their gross home-made food ruins a good movie experience.

    So $30? hell yes.. invite over the neighbors and family and crank up the theater speakers and turn on your 60″ tv or 120″ 1080p Projector!

    The losers can go pack into a theater and deal with the human element.. All you normal people with class come to my house for a free movie.

  • http://twitter.com/lafemmefollette Elle

    I am not as fired-up as you are in this vein, but your ire does make me vividly remember when we paid our sitter $10/hr to go out & see the 3-hour “Watchmen” and the theater was full of kids. Babies crying; preschoolers with their pants scared off; parents, who brought their tweens, giving off total OMGWTFKFC vibe because of all the sex & full-frontal nudity. (But not the grisly gore, no.)

  • http://twitter.com/lafemmefollette Elle

    If I may add “family ticketing” in support of the idea that it is worth it. We just paid almost $50 in ticket prices for the 4 of us to see Rango at a truly inconvenient time, in a theatre full of children who could not shut it and parents who did not seem to care. $30 to watch it after breakfast some morning? Deal! I might buy a teevee!

  • http://www.matmullen.com Mat Mullen

    Handbrake + Apple TV + AirPlay is hard to beat.

    $30 wouldn’t be terrible if the movie came out on VOD the same time as the theater but I’ve read that it will only be 60 days after the initial release date.

  • http://david.ulevitch.com/ Anonymous

    “small screen 55″ — Someone needs a reality check.

  • http://david.ulevitch.com/ Anonymous

    Seconded!

  • http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/ PKafka

    Yup. Hollywood can’t cut out the theater owners, who are already complaining about this development.

  • Eric

    This must be some strange new use of the word “smart” which I was previously unaware of.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t think this has long-term potential. People just don’t care most of the time about when a movie is. We’re surrounded by menus of on-demand movies for pennies an hour to about $2 an hour. So few movies will benefit from this.

    Adding 3D and other features you can’t get at home is how you get your $10 a ticket. Making movies that are community events like LOTR or Harry Potter is how you get your $10 a ticket. Not charging $30 for something that will be $3 in 6 months.

    What if you went to see a movie and it was preceded by a live videoconference introduction by one of the movie’s stars? The actors and directors spend days doing the same interview with cookie cutter shows trying to entice people to go to the cinema. Why not put the stars at the cinema, saying “hello Brooklyn!” before a show? Take a couple of questions from paying customers, not TV hostdrones. Make the cinema more of a live event. Make the cinema experience better if people are not going. Duh.

    At home, they should focus on bringing in 4K screens and downloads, so you can outclass a Netflix stream and the user’s DVD collection by far. Everybody thinks too small! It is so early in digital, there are a million improvements to be made and sold. Real improvements, not financial instruments, casino economy BS, today the same thing costs more than tomorrow, read the fine print. Failure of imagination and innovation.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yovillevolos Yovile Volos

    $30 only? What a bargain!!! lol I will never go to the cinema again it is way to expensive, i will instead buy my movies for $30, make my own pop corn and get coke from the supermarket!!! Wow, what a bargain $30!!!! LOL, you guys are crazy!

  • http://profiles.google.com/jasani.2 Ashish Jasani

    I hope this spurs more illegal content. Pirates will be able to RIP these movies and post them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=692271649 Luis Eduardo Gutierrez

    It would have even if they cost $15 for rentals.

  • http://profiles.google.com/dubaiinfo2011 Dubai information

    Thanks for sharing. Good resources.

  • http://profiles.google.com/galmovies2011 Movies gallery

    Good post…

Just Married

May 19, 2012 at 6:32 pm PT

GM Doesn’t Like Old Media, Either

May 18, 2012 at 12:41 pm PT

Hear That?

May 18, 2012 at 6:35 am PT

Latest Video

View all videos »

Search »

Twitter’s still in its honeymoon period, but that won’t last forever. At some point, it’s going to be less of a wunderkammer, and more of a regrettable necessity.

— Reuters finance blogger Felix Salmon, in an article entitled “Why Twitter will get more annoying”