Slashdot Mirror
Theaters Unhappy About Faster DVD Releases
dolphinlover writes "As movie studios such as Walt Disney Co. have pushed for more rapid DVD releases of movies to combat piracy on the Internet, executives of movie theater chains such as Regal Entertainment Group and National Amusements Inc. have countered, saying that seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience' and that the time window between movie and DVD releases should even be extended. Their views run counter to Disney's Chief Executive Rober Iger view that DVDs ought to come out simultaneously with the theater releases of movies. Both sides say their plans would benefit consumers. Is either correct, or are both approaching the situation from the wrong angle?"
I download my movies, you insensitive clod!
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Regal Entertainment Group and National Amusements Inc. have countered, saying that seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience'
If seeing a movie in the theater is so significantly better, then there should be no problem here, right? If it's so much "fuller" and "more entertaining," then it should be able to stand on its own without worrying about when DVDs get released.
That's just not the case, though. Many people only go to theaters because that's where movies go first, and people don't want to wait. When given the choice, many would rather have the DVD. It's cheaper (two movie tickets is often more than the DVD price, and you can watch the DVD whenever you like), the food isn't overpriced, you can sit in more comfortable seats, you don't have to deal with people yelling "WHERE YOU AT" into their cell phones, no commercials, no waiting for the movie to start, you can pause the movie if you need to go to the bathroom, the floors aren't sticky, you don't have to drive anywhere, you don't have to deal with other people asking each other "okay so who's that?" and conversely you can converse with your fellow movie-watchers without getting told to shut up, etc. Yes, you have a big screen and nice sound in the theater, but home theater systems are constantly getting better.
The theaters are threatened because a lot of people DO prefer watching movies at home, and they're losing their major advantage. If they don't like it, they should try to make their experience better, not bitch and moan about quick DVD releases.
How could consumers possibly benefit from fewer choices? If seeing the movie in the theater is better, then I'll do that regardless of whether the DVD is out.
Are theatre owners across the nation members of a union of some sort? Or an association that collectively negotiates with the movie studios? I'd love to see these guys shut down their theatres for a few weeks just before a few big blockbusters are set to be released.
Going to the cinema does make for a better movie experience, however smaller screens and more choice have (for me anyway) ironically removed the big premier movies, over here now my local cinema has closed and left only the megaplex type places which don't feel the same.
The cinemas are being pushed to show more and more films, with releases almost every weekend it feels very diluted with no build up.
I would goto the cinema here in England if opening night was worldwide instead of opening in America weeks or months ahead, the first time you hear about a movie makes your mind up - if thats months before the UK release you end up hearing about the next big American movie and forget about the one you wanted to see.
We live in a global village and the internet has allowed us to hear the hype about American releases much sooner than they are available, there was a time when tv/magazines etc would begin the push once it reached our shores, there might be a one liner about some premier or other, but the magazines focued on what was available over here, now within days of the American release theres a cam or a screener available (sometimes sooner) - no need to spend cash.
So global releases and hype when it is due will get me back, I couldn't care less about delay to DVD as long as the movie is available in the cinemas when I hear about it.
liqbase
The side that gives consumers choice is right. So let's see who that is. Movie producer is saying: let's put the DVD's out at the same time. That will allow consumers to decide whether to buy or to see the movie in the theater. The theaters want to keep the movies out of consumers hands, forceing them to see the movie in the theater if they want to be able to talk about the movie in the watercooler relevance timeframe.
So the movie producer is right.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
What we're really seeing here is the invisible hand of the market correcting an imbalance that's existed for a long time. The stick is piracy: studios don't like it, obviously. The carrot is, if you release the film on DVD immediately, people will buy that instead of the pirated version. A win for everyone except the pirates and the theaters.
And what about the theaters? They've had us over a barrel for years, charging insane prices for tickets and for food from the concession stand. This isn't going to be a lot of fun for them, because now their audience is going to be solely people who actually like to go to movie theaters. And this is certainly smaller than the audience of people who either like to go to movie theaters or don't like to wait for movies to hit video.
The theater owners are in denial about this - they're not planning for it - and that's going to hurt them, unfortunately. If they were to jump on board and start planning for the inevitable, I think it'd work out pretty well. In the long run, it'll work out anyway - some people really do like to see a movie in a theater. I certainly do. Target that audience, and give that audience the experience they want, and you've got a solid business. Unfortunately, it's probably a smaller business than the one you have now. Sad for theater operators, but really not fixable.
So why don't the theaters step up to the plate? Besides fixing all the other things that they often need to (which will be brought up endlessly in this thread) why not sell the DVDs? Here is the theory:
You go to a movie and you when come out you are offered the chance to buy the DVD of the movie you just saw for... $10. Same with the soundtrack (for $6).
If you liked the movie, then you can buy the DVD right then and there. If you didn't, then you don't have to buy it. This would be an extra source of revenue for the theaters, and would probably boost DVD sales (since it would be much easier to sell to someone who just watched the movie than someone walking by a display in Wal*Mart or Best Buy). Those who don't go to movie theaters (like me) would still buy the DVD at a store as usual.
In fact, by selling that DVD for $10 and not the normal $20, I'm betting there are people who would go to the theater just to buy that DVD that way. The cost of that DVD ($10) plus the cost of the movie ($20?) would be more than the DVD alone at a store ($20), but they would also get to have the theater experience for what would be a discount ($10 difference) compared to normal price.
Theaters are still trying to be what they were in the 70s when you couldn't watch any movie you want any time. Heck, things have hardly changed from the 40s in the theaters, except for the lack of newsreels and the amazing number of ads they show.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
In a movie theater, no matter where I sit, the loudest person in the theater always ends up sitting next to me.
Don't let your girlfriend catch you saying that.
What is it that they could be pissed off about? If the delay between theater and DVD is at least 4 weeks, that's more than enough as most movies are in and out of the theater chain system by then anyway. The only theaters that might have a problem would be the dollar theaters, but they tend to show indie films anyway. What the theaters should really be pissed about is how movie studios are churning out complete and absolute shit that is not attracting much of an audience.
-=*(CC)*=-
It's funny because it's true.
neuro at well dot com (when I post, it's my opinions, no-one elses)
I'm for simultaneous release.
There will always be those who will want to see a movie in the commercial theaters. These are most likely folks who have chosen, for whatever reason, not to invest in home theater setups. There's no problem with that at all.
There will also be those who couldn't be paid to set foot into a commercial theater. These are folks who have chosen to go the home-theater route, however much they chose to spend, and who are tired of screaming kids, sticky floors, and inconsiderate boobs who don't seem to know where the 'Off' switch is on their cellphone or pager. There's no problem with this mindset either.
So, with that in mind: Go ahead and do simultaneous release of DVD and in-theater. Let the paying consumer choose what format they want to see the movie in. Even better, get the rental outlets to pick up on it when the DVD hits. That way, if it looks too good to be true (as 'Robots' did to me... Lord, what a dud!), it'll be low-risk to the buying public to find out.
Heck, simultaneous release might even provide motivation for the studios to put out better movies. If they do such a release, and it bombs, the loss will be much greater than if they just did a theatrical release, so the motivation will be "Do a better job!"
Keep the peace(es).
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
Quite simply, they're both coming at it from the angle of their own revenue streams. There's no right and wrong, you just need to choose whose pile of money you're talking about.
+5 Insightful, really!
Maybe, if you can avoid 20+ minutes of annoying ads followed by 15 minutes of previews. And if you manage to get an audience where people don't spend the entire movie yakking on cell phones or narrating the action to their friends "Later in the movie you find out that 'Rosebud' is his sled. But this is the part where..."
A good trip to the movie theater is much better than just watching TV because it's a communal experience. It's the modern equivalent of sitting around a campfire listening spellbound to a good storyteller. When you interfere with that experience -- by playing obnoxious ads or by talking -- you make it worse than the solitary experience of the living room. People are less inclined to go to the effort to risk all that frustration.
What can theaters do?
And if rude audience members would just be a little more polite, and studios would make better movies, the rest of us would be more inclined to go in the first place.
Just out of curiosity, when Americans are spending billions of dollars a year on stuff called "Home Theater," what did theaters think was going to happen to revenue?
Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
Regal isn't playing with a full deck anyway... http://www.alternet.org/story/34016/
Remember when book stores were supposedly going away?
Well, a lot of the neighborhood ones are gone. But there are still plenty of bookstores going strong. They either are huge box stores that offer espresso, a wide variety of magazines and books for browsing, and comfy chairs; or -- they are specialist stores with knowledgeable staff and also have a nice browsing environment and a variety of related goods (e.g. sci fi books and gaming). Either way, these stores are not just means of distributing books; they're destinations you go to in their own right.
I think if the theaters truly believed that the experience they offer is so much better than the home theater experience, they could survive even if movies were simultaneously released for DVD, download and theater. They'd be happier and make more money if the other media didn't exist of course. But, I think, the experience they offer is not so superior that most people would bother. They are not, in other words, places you'd go to for their own sake.
Which is odd in a way. The old neighborhood movie houses were. Sometimes you went down to the movies to see a movie you had to see. Othertimes you just went to see whatever they were showing you, or more likley a double feature, with a cartoon reel and maybe a news reel. What's interesting is that the neighborhood movies houses that haven't been abandoned or carved into little bits still are destinations in their own right, if not to the same degree they were once. The sterile suburban cineplexes are possibly an idea whose time has come and is going.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Hello, McFly, anybody home? At $8.00+ a pop per person for a ticket and about another $15 to $20 for food and drinks only to have to sit in a crowded room with idiots on their cell phones, large groups of annoying teenagers, retards who bring their crying infants and old women explaining things scene by scene to their deaf husbands, do you wonder why consumers are increasingly staying home?
Going to see a movie is about more than just the movie, it's about the experience and as it stands now in most theaters, the experience sucks. There's an awesome theater about a half hour away with huge seats spaced far enough apart where you can order good food (not just pop corn and candy) and alcoholic beverages. If I'm going to spend a small fortune to go see a show it'll be in a place like that. Otherwise I'm hitting the second run theater a month after the show comes out or catching it on DVD 6 months later.
It boils down to prices versus experience. If I'm going to be in a crowded theater with seats close together and have to put up with all of the other crap I mentioned above, then it better be for a reasonable price. I don't mind paying more, but it better be in a theater that provides an experience that justifies the price.
It's a shame too because I used to love going to the movies but now I reserve it for the big budget, special effects laded summer popcorn flicks. Those spectacles were made to be enjoyed on the big screen and I'm willing to tolerate the crap some of the time.
I love when people bitch about the price of cinema snacks, because you simply don't have to buy any! I mean, it's not hard, folks. I generally get a coffee or something that's very close to the price on the outside world, and save my money for another movie ticket or a beer afterwords. I figured out snacks were a rip off 25 years ago.
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Having a cool home theater system is nice and all but sometimes I just want a reason to go do something. And local theater is really, really hit or miss, and rock shows are loud and it sucks to have to stand around for hours after you've been working all week. What's wrong with going out to a movie?
P.S. I know, I know ... I must be new here.
Breakfast served all day!
SUV 20mpg.. $6/2.50=2.4 Gallons
2.4X20=48 Miles round trip.
24 Miles one way.
I live 30 miles from the nearest Theater.. But only 2 miles from Blockbuster/walmart.
-Jason
This is /.
You mean his mother.
I don't want to watch a crappy compressed version of a film in ANY case. Pirated downloads don't come close to the quality of a DVD. I won't watch the little blurry thing with lousy sound. The entertainment value isn't worth the time it takes to watch it.
I think there are plenty of movies that I end up never seeing because of the lag time between theater release and DVD release. I don't want to spend $20 for tickets (3 in my family) plus $20 for snacks just to put up with all the theater distractions mentioned previously for a movie that I'm not DYING to see. Once three months have gone by before the DVD is out and the buzz is gone I generally find my interest in the film has waned as well. However, if I could get it around the same time as it opens in the theater for $15 or $20 you bet I'd buy it!
Very few people would switch to pirated downloads who were previously paying hand over fist to see the film in the theater. The huge majority would just start buying the DVD instead, and would likely spend more on movies than they did previously.
Life is short: void the warranty.
What benefits the consumer is what the consumer wants. What do they want? Do they want the theater experience or do they want the comfort of their own home entertainment center?
Frankly, Even at $25 for two tickets and popcorn, and seeing a movie approxamitely once every other week, if I decided to save that money, I'd still not have enough money for the minimum payment on a $5000 entertainment center, complete with surround sound and super sized TV.
I also find the experience of a theater very enjoyable. The screen is bigger than I can buy anywhere, the accoustics and sound system at a modern theater are very good in my experience, AND I get the experience of being in an audience. Laughing and cheering with a bunch of people in a theater has always made any more more enjoyable. Some of the star wars haters will always complain, but the feeling of the audience whooping and hollering when Yoda uses the force to whip out his lightsabre and get into a fighting stance... it's priceless emotion.
And nothing beats an action movie on a huge screen. Sense and sensibility doesn't lose anything being watched on your TV, but you had to see... and I mean SEE... episode 3 on a big screen at least once to get the beauty of the visuals... if you are into that sort of thing.
Now, you may prefer being at home and not want to deal with the muck on the floor, or stupid people with cell phones. You may not want to have to deal with schedules or times. These do not bother me as much. I'm selective of my movie theaters and some of those theaters do suck much more than others. I prefer comfortable seats and decent equipment and no weird smells. If you don't have a theater like this, I would not be surprised if you prefer home theaters. If your eyes aren't sharp like mine then pretty special effects might not impress you at a 50 foot viewing angle.
The point is, the market should go where ever the market says it wants. If people like movies in the theater, fine. If people want to see more movies sooner at home instead, fine. BOTH of these men are looking at the issue from a selfish perspective, regardless of who is right. I believe there will always be demand for movies in the theater, but how much is dependent on the people buying the tickets and DVDs, not the CEO pigs who want to take your money regardless of what you really want.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Theaters traditionally make more money per ticket the longer a film is out. The first hot weekend, much more of the ticket costs go to the distributors, later, the theater keeps more and more of the ticket price.
Studios are incented to pack everyone into the first weekend. Theaters want nothing more than the sleeper hit of the year -- where audience builds over time.
Faster dvd releases mean less opportunity for the most profitable time a movie is in the theaters.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
If you want the theater experience to be a 'more entertaining experience' then you need to do a few things.
1. Pay the workers more than min wage. That way they're be cheerful and friendly to me.
2. Don't make me pay insane prices for food/drink.
3. Start to use digital projectors. (Make the experience better with better looking films.)
4. Show better films. (Talk to your friends in Hollywood, tell them to spend less of their budgets on marketing and more on the script.)
5. Move the seats further apart. Make it a comfortable experience.
6. Fewer commericals. (More trailers instead.)
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Greetings from piracy ground zero (southeast Asia). The day a movie comes out in the cinema anywhere, I can find it at any of dozens of shops within a 10-minute walk of my home on DVD for US$2. The quality is bad for the first few weeks, but the shopkeepers are honest about it, and customers can decide whether it's worth waiting for a better version.
Hollywood studios used to release films months later here than in the US. Absolutely everyone watched the pirated ones, and cinemas were empty, closing down left and right.
Now they do simultaneous release (US and Asia), there is a new breed of cinemas with reclining seats and über-THX Dolby what-have-you, tickets are US$2.50, and films don't stay in the cinema longer than 2 or 3 weeks (this is easier than in the west because there is a far wider range of films to show - in addition to all the American movies they show Hong Kong, Korean, Indian, Japanese stuff, subtitled into 2 or 3 languages depending on the source).
It seems to be working. The cinemas are crowded - last show at the big ones in town is after midnight and even then there are a lot of sold-out screens. The first week a popular movie is out, the only way you're going to see it in the evening is if you make a reservation online or via mobile. People go to the movies for the experience, because the experience is genuinely different from watching at home. And then when the supply of people who want that experience is tapped out, they leave it to the pirates.
So I really don't think the availability of DVDs is cannibalising the cinemas' market. Or if it is, they have successfully adapted to it.
Granted, I've never seen a legit DVD for sale here and I couldn't imagine where to go to find one, but I guess not everyone can be a winner.
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
I bet they wonder why I rank them with telemarketers and spammers...
This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
The typical theater deal is "90% over nut." The nut is the cost of running the theater. Ticket proceeds first pay that, and then 90% of the remainder goes to the distributor, and only 10% to the theater. The profits come almost entirely from the snack bar.
Some movies, such as Star Trek, attact crowds that eat so much junk food that theaters pay 100% over nut--*no* profits other than snack bar.
hawk
How about I get a copy of the DVD for going to the theater? Or make the DVD an optional part of the ticket price? Or you can decide if you want to buy the DVD when you leave?
James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
Do these people live in a bubble? Have they never even been to a theater? For me and date to see a movie, it costs close to $20 now, before popcorn, drinks, and the other "experiences".
Then when you finally get to a seat, a sticky seat, you have to mess with cell phone users, talkers, smokers, babies, etc. The volume is either ear-drum blowingly loud, or whisper quiet. Plus, movies lately have sucked. Does any of this seem fuller and more enteraining? Any of it sound worth $20?
For $20, I can get 2 or 3 movies, see them as many times as I want within a WEEK, with as many people that can cram into the living room. I can control volume and I can even pause the movie to run to the R/R. I know my seat won't be sticky, and if anyone has to use the phone or smoke, they go out on the porch.
Now what sounds more like a more enteraining experience?
"We need to be focused on bringing the wow factor back to the experience," she said. "Movies are meant to be seen in the theater."
n er seats at a theater (and while I'm slightly overweight I'm no fatty, only a size 12. Buying an elliptical to shed the fat, BTW)
seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience'
I prefer watching movies at home with friends. Here's why:
- I keep my floors clean.
- My chairs, sofa, futon, etc. are very comfortable - unlike backache-inducing, more-cramped-than-coach-seats-on-commercial-airli
- I can put my feet up, stretch, lie down, hop on one foot, or stand on my head while watching a movie at home
- No annoying people yelling "Oh no you di'nt" at the screen
- film's superior resolution is more than negated relative to DVD by perpetually-out-of-focus projectors. If my television ever goes out of focus I'll crack it open and adjust it, or replace it. Theaters never bother to pay a "projectionist" to maintain focus throughout a movie - or even adjust focus beforehand
- Even stadium seating sucks
- I can pause DVDs for pee breaks
- I can eat whatever I want during a movie at home, drink water without paying $3.00 for 16oz of tap water, make a milkshake, or whatever
- My sound system at home (mostly Pioneer Elite components) is far superior to typical movie theater systems
Now, if they were to keep the movies in focus, push seat rows slightly further apart so I can put my feet up (or let the seat lean back a little more), either clean up the floor or throw out punks who leave a mess (or preferably both), oh, and did I mention actually focusing the projector? Then, a theater experience might be better than a DVD. I've seen only ONE movie in the last few years that was very crisply focus, and it went out of focus just a few minutes into it.
I really would like to know why paying $11/person to watch an out-of-focus movie on a big screen is superior to OWNING the DVD for between $9.00 and $25.00 and watching it in very crisp focus on a 36" screen. Somebody please explain this to me. I've only bothered going to one movie in the last year (Chronicles of Narnia/The Lion, the Witch, and The Wardrobe) and that's ONLY because I've been a fan of the Narnia books for 23 years. I usually wait for the movie to hit DVD before seeing it.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Alot of readers here have already pointed out the physical theater disadvantages, commercials, exorbitant ticket & food prices, cell phones, and voice-overs, so I won't bother expanding upon those point.
Hollywood is just trying to figure out the fastest way to sell us crap and DVD is cheaper than sending out 2400, 88-min long, film reels.
"The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
When my wife and I went to England in '01, we went to an IMAX theater that was playing several movies (6+ I think). It was setup just like a regular movie theater - popcorn, pop, etc - and business was booming. These weren't regular movies migrated to IMAX, but the selection was still great and the movies we saw were awesome.
Besides all the rude people talking on phones, kicking my seat, kids crying through the R rated film, etc. DVD's make more sense on the wallet too.
Actually, DVDs make more sense for all the rude people too. They can pause the movie when the phone rings, stretch their legs when they feel the need, and quiet their crying kids without annoying shushes.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
The incubation period for the Flu is from 24 to 72 hours.
d Overview.htm
Source: http://www.yale.edu/yhp/departments/health_ed/Col
The incubation period for the Common Cold is from 2 to 3 days.
Source: http://medplant.nmsu.edu/Diseases/cold/cold.htm
Mod parent down as Wrong.
occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
Granted, it's been a few years, but when I was in Norway, I was impressed at how much more courteous and polite everyone was. I don't think this problem is anything other than the decline of etiquette in the USA.
alright, after reading the same stuff about movie theatres for the two hundredth time in a row I have to say KNOCK IT OFF!!!
everyone knows how horrible the movie experience in movie theatres is...
it's expensive, the floor is sticky, rude employees, loud people, loud babys etc
it is simply not necessary that EACH AND EVERY ONE of you posts these same points
everyone in the world knows this
everyone except hollywood which is still thinking "uh, it's the piracys fault, that noone buys our movies ALTHOUGH the special effects get better and better all the time"
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
In fact, just after television came on the scene, the film industry was forced to introduce "novelties" like Cinerama, CinemaScope ("Movies Are Better Than Ever!" went 20th Century Fox's ad slogan) and Panavision to counter the "let's just stay home and watch TV!" attitude that was beginning to arise in the early 50s.
Lately, we've seen the advent of stadium seating and of course IMAX. While technically impressive, these latter-day improvements to the motion picture theater experience are really just a continuation of the battle for entertainment consumers' hearts and minds.
Now, with the very-affordable home theater systems available today, and high-density DVD formats about to make their entry, I think it's only a matter of time before theaters begin to die. The cost of transportation, tickets and concessions, not to mention the use of precious time, aren't worth it already to a great many people.
Within ten years, I predict that "new release" will mean a film is now available via subscription service to download to your home theater system, and indoor movie theaters will seem as quaint then as drive-in theaters do now.
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
You think purses are great? Get a friend in a wheelchair, or a wheelchair for yourself!
For one showing, we were able to fit a 6 pack of Cokes, several bags of chips, boxes of various candies, etc. under the seat of a friend of mine's wheelchair (he is actually paralyzed). The only camouflage necessary was a coat thrown over the back and, if someone does see you, the odds of a theater flunky stopping a guy in a wheelchair are slim to none! It's foolproof!
I'm really curious why this is such a problem "over there". I've yet to go to a movie here in Oslo, Norway where there's anything like that (not counting movies for kids).
I'm surprised you have to ask this question. As most of the international community seems to know, there are a large amount of people in the United States who are pompous, arrogant assholes.
execu
The catch is, they're not just arrogant assholes when they come to visit your lovely communities; they're also arrogant assholes here at home. And the rest of us, who aren't assholes, have to put up with them because for some unknown reason laws allowing us to beat the shit out of them for being assholes have yet to be drafted.
Really, if it were legal to beat the shit out of an asshole, there'd be a lot less assholes around.
Our AMC theatre (the AMC 30 in Olathe, KS) has an open food policy, you don't need to smuggle anything in. Rumor has it that a someone with strict dietary restrictions (religious, diabetic, I'm not sure) threatened to sue because of the limited concession offerrings, and the theatre buckled.
We abuse the policy all the time, bringing in large meals (especially chinese takeout).
One day, we will roast a pig in there.
I don't want trailers(which are ads).
I don't mind ads that are that well targetted to their demographic. Personally, as someone who likes movies, I feel I benefit from being told what movies are coming. And the actual trailers are usually quite enjoyable in their own right. It's not a zero sum game. They benefit. I benefit.