Re: this week in review....

[Tony Abruzzese <abruzzese@biochem.bumc.bu.edu>]

Joseph Pappalardo wrote:

>Let's say a theater owner operator has booked a blockbuster film...say,
>Titanic.
>
>So...said theater owner it wants to keep it successful...so on many of the
>other screens in the chain/complex they deliberately puts less successful
>films on them
>(slasher movies, "already run" titles, maybe some Turner Classic Movie
>fare...[already available on video and TV, cable & PPV].
>
>By limiting the competition, the value of a ticket to the primary movie is
>protected and can charge the big $$$ for ticket sales.
>
>Does this scenario plausible?
>
Not really... Why let all of the seats in your other theaters go empty 
to fill only one theater? The screens do notcompete with each other.
They collectively contribute to the bottom line.

As far as the theater owner's bottom line goes, any empty seat in the
complex is lost revenue. That's why you will often see "blockbusters"
running on three or more screens at a cineplex each showtime offset by  
:15,  :20, or :30 for the first 2-3 weeks of release. 


*********************************************************************
Tony Abruzzese                  e-mail: abruzzese@biochem.bumc.bu.edu
Network Administrator                         Biochemistry Department
              Boston University School of Medicine
Telephone:617.638.5092                               Fax:617.638.5339
*********************************************************************