Originally Posted by Don Landis
Regal reported an astounding 833% profit increase in 2010 for Q3. The reason they claimed was due to 3D and IMAX 3D upcharges. It was so good they distributed a huge one time dividend of $1.40 per share then raised dividends for projected earnings increase for 2011 by 16.7%.
People can make up sh!t about stuff to support their myths but when companies put money where their mouth is, I believe that! 3D is a winner and a money maker. The way theaters make money is to offer something the general public can't get at home. 2010 it was a proliferation of quality 3D. When 3D becomes ubiquitous in the home then the theaters will need to find something else to achieve profits.
Don, I re-wrote my post this morning since I was half-asleep when composing it last night. Most of it is the same but some had been added.
Believe it or not, we both agree that as of now 3D is a winner and money maker in the theaters - it literally salvaged the industry from suffering an overall decrease in revenue.
But those big profits related to 3D were due to higher ticket prices and not higher or equal attendance and as Jeff Blake said, head counts aren't as important as the money being made (eight people paying $20 brings in more revenue than nine paying $16). And the industry admits it is trying to win back movie goers and since overall profits have been flat these past few years, so is the uncertainty about the future.
Don't forget, investments are made on what a commodity is projected be worth in the future, not on what it is worth at the present time whereas profits are based on what the commodity is worth now with successful investors having made their commitments sometime back. So the question is what is being invested now.
More movie theaters becoming equipped for 3D was a commitment made by the theater industry when Avatar and others pushed 3D into new heights of money making. Are exhibitors still planning to do the same now? Producers are also investing less capital into the production of true 3D movies in lieu of less the inexpensive but more profitable 2D to 3D conversion process -- but these have been criticized by most fans of 3D technology. So is investment in 3D beginning to curve downward, just like in the consumer electronics industry with all major manufacturers holding back on production for at least this first quarter? Attached is one analysis:http://www.reelmovienews.com/2010/08...hard-too-soon/
What is the big investment now for exhibitors? One might be the dine-in theater.http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...285064856.html
3D is a unique art form and the industry should lower prices to propel interest rather than look for the quick, windfall profits. It has always been my contention that 3D in the home won't catch on with the mainstream because of the economic factors, not for lack of interest or the need to wear glasses. If lowering the cost of ticket prices is not financially possible, the same factors might apply to the movie theater experience from both the supplier's and consumer's perspective.
In the long-term, more people buying tickets at lower prices could sustain 3D as a profitable enterprise for many years to come. But as you correctly said in your reply to my original post, 3D is a business venture and if less overhead can achieve the same amount of revenue, the industry will disband 3D in a heart beat and resussetate it again for the next generation of movie goers.