Slashdot Mirror


Struggling MoviePass Kills Off Its Annual Plan -- Even If You Already Paid For It (nypost.com)

Slashdot reader nolaguy quotes the New York Post: Movie subscription service MoviePass has pulled the plug on annual subscriptions, telling those subscribers that they will have to adhere to the same terms as monthly subscribers. The service made the announcement Friday in an email to those members and offered them prorated refunds if they want to cancel their annual memberships.... Until Friday's announcement, subscribers to the $89 annual plans had been able to see a movie a day.
CNET reports that MoviePass "is now forcing you onto its monthly three-movie-a-month plan -- effective immediately...and you'll receive up to a $5.00 discount on any additional movie tickets purchased." They're plannning to apply the $89 annual fees toward the $9.95 monthly fees, but.... To add insult to injury, MoviePass says you'll only have until Aug. 31 -- a week from today -- if you want to get some of your money back in the form of a prorated refund, which you can only get by canceling your plan. And just to make things more ridiculous, MoviePass is preying on your FOMO by saying that if you do take the refund, you won't be able to sign up for MoviePass again for nine months.
CNET's article ends with a link to their list of "the 11 times that MoviePass altered the deal," adding "This is getting sad. And a little shady."

122 comments

  1. Momma' said, if it sounds too good to be true... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    it probably is. I'm having a difficult time feeling too sorry for members.

  2. *sniff* *sniff* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you smell that? It smells like a lawsuit cooking up to me!

    1. Re: *sniff* *sniff* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you pay court fees to sue a company that has no money?

    2. Re: *sniff* *sniff* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's where my revolutionary new startup comes in - CourtPass! For a low monthly fee we'll pay up to three court dues a month!

  3. Doesn't affect Costco Purchasers ... Yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you purchased through Costco, your plan is still valid through the original end date.

    Still, a lot of people are getting full (not prorated) refunds from Costco because of this mess.

    1. Re:Doesn't affect Costco Purchasers ... Yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I asked for a refund the same day they began asking me for ticket stub pictures due to multiple changes in the terms.
      The first and only ticket stub picture I submitted was using the "not listed" option for the movie "Upgrade" and taking a picture of flushing the stub down the toilet.

      I was surprised that Costco issued a full refund and not a prorated refund, but I don't know if Costco covered the refund or if they were/are able to recover funds from MP.

    2. Re:Doesn't affect Costco Purchasers ... Yet by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      That explains why I haven't gotten the email that has been mentioned in various stories. But the restrictions on what movies are available remain and have been hampered my use of MoviePass. I won't be asking for a refund because there is still enough value to continuing to use it for the rest of the year (assuming it keeps working that long), but renewing is another question.

  4. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who knew that saying still applies with modern platforms?

  5. Deliver or get sued by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    If I buy something, you deliver or my lawyer has a field day. Either's fine with me.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I buy something, you deliver or my lawyer has a field day.

      Not that I don't agree with your sentiment, but how many thousand dollars is $89 worth to you?

    2. Re:Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      LoL you can get in line behind everyone else, and then they'll go out of business and you'll be stuck with your lawyer's fees. You and your litigious ilk are what's wrong with our society these days. Why do you hate capitalism and people who try to be creative and start businesses?

    3. Re:Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You did read the fine print, right? The words that said they reserve the right to change the terms at will (just like your credit card for example). You can either accept the new terms or cancel (just like your credit card). If you cancel, you are entitled to a refund of the unused portion of your annual membership.

      That, combined with the fact that their pockets are empty means there will be no lawsuit heyday. The consumer has very limited recourse.

    4. Re: Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suing is a pretty capitalistic behavior, it's just also pro-consumer. Why some people think businesses are so scared their practices shouldn't be questioned, like everything else, is beyond me.

      As a consumer, if I don't play by the stacks and stacks of rules set against me, I'm stupid, but if a business exploits the rules, they're somehow being "clever" and should be praised for their ingenuity and legal prowess.

    5. Re:Deliver or get sued by alexo · · Score: 1

      If I buy something, you deliver or my lawyer has a field day. Either's fine with me.

      Win or lose, the lawyers always have a field day.
      That's how the system is set up.

    6. Re: Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STFU. This is not business as usual. There is no capitalism in a company trying to replace every theater ticket booth with their app and just insert themselves as the gatekeeper of "affordable" movies. MoviePass needs to build their own theaters to do what they want.

    7. Re:Deliver or get sued by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Ah, your lawyer gets to go play in the open field, get some fresh air... That's nice.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    8. Re:Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His lawyer is a little horse.

    9. Re:Deliver or get sued by novakyu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Two words: class action.

      Absent the right clauses in TOS, this is the kind of case class actions were made for—many people were wronged and large amount of financial damage has been inflicted, but individual suits do not make financial sense.

    10. Re:Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "If I buy something, you deliver or my lawyer has a field day."

      Small wonder. Your lawyer gets his money from you either way while you get zilch. They just love stupid fucks like you.

    11. Re:Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool, can't wait to get my 3 dollars from a class action. That's assuming MoviePass even has enough money to pay out of a class action, which they don't.

    12. Re:Deliver or get sued by WinstonWolfIT · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You high? They'll be shuttered in a week and you're behind a very long line of creditors.

    13. Re:Deliver or get sued by novakyu · · Score: 1

      The biggest benefit I get is from their deterrent effects—and the joy I get from knowing that class action lawyers will finally be able to pay their bills and make ends meet.

    14. Re:Deliver or get sued by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      What deterrent? These guys are like the multi-level marketing guys. They get shut down, declare bankruptcy and recycle the scheme endlessly.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    15. Re:Deliver or get sued by sjames · · Score: 1

      Since they are offering a prorated refund, no financial damage has been done and the suit would fail.

    16. Re:Deliver or get sued by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You get a prorated refund. What's wrong with that? What did you contract say you would get that you think you deserve more?

    17. Re:Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They require customers to act within a limited time frame to get their prorated refund instead of issuing directly. That's fraudulent behavior.

      The suit would win.

    18. Re: Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually sort of ironic this is mentioned here.

      A lot of people didn't notice but on a few of the other Slashdot articles covering MoviePass, a few wise people pointed out that one of the main founders of the company has and has had active lawsuits against him. I think he also defrauded two banks in India. This company was a shit show from the beginning.

    19. Re:Deliver or get sued by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Since they are offering a prorated refund, no financial damage has been done and the suit would fail.

      That's not how it works, a contract is a commitment on both sides and the liability is based on the harm caused. Imagine you'd rented a billboard for a year but because they've given you too good a deal or there's a shortage and prices have gone up they say "sorry we're cancelling our yearly deals but you'll get the rest prorated, we now only have a monthly lease that's much more expensive" that would be a classic case where you could sue for the difference.

      And when doing that you don't have to go looking for deals, that you can leave to the defendant. "Based on my historic use of MoviePass I would go see 8 movies a month. They are now trying to walk out on 6 months of service. 8*6 = 48 tickets. 48 tickets * full price = $500. They offer me $50 in prorated fee, I'm taking them to small claims court for $500-$50 = $450. That's without weasel words in the contract, which is why they're usually there. But if they never really thought this would happen or their lawyers had a bad day then no you can't just cut a deal short like that.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    20. Re:Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two words: class action.

      Absent the right clauses in TOS, this is the kind of case class actions were made for—many people were wronged and large amount of financial damage has been inflicted, but individual suits do not make financial sense.

      Want to bet that there was an arbitration clause in the TOS?

    21. Re:Deliver or get sued by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      What he does in his spare time is none of my business.

      Though the MLP-collection behind him on the shelf does look silly, I give you that...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    22. Re:Deliver or get sued by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I always get my money.

      When lawyer fail, Boris next.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    23. Re:Deliver or get sued by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Since they are offering a prorated refund, no financial damage has been done and the suit would fail.

      That's not how it works, a contract is a commitment on both sides and the liability is based on the harm caused.

      If they get their money back, there are no actual damages, since the customers were the consumers and not a business reselling those seats to actual consumers. I would be boggled if the contract didn't give Moviepass the right to terminate the service, so there's probably no breach of contract there anyway.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    24. Re:Deliver or get sued by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      How much did this cost you? If it's not several hundred dollars or impairs your life in some great way, any lawyer that offers to take your case is a sham. Walk away very fast. Actually, flag down a ride and ride away very fast.

      Stuff like movie pass is what small clams court is for.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    25. Re:Deliver or get sued by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      Skip the lawyer, got straight to Boris. At least he is honest and takes pride in his work.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    26. Re:Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some report problems getting the refund (likely due to the website being flooded with requests. Others are reporting that the pro-rated refund they got was nothing like they expected (though sometimes in their favor, up-to and including full refunds) because they have inaccurate account start dates.

      This is a shit show & I'd be surprised if there were not a class action suit. Whether this company has resources to pay a settlement or judgement against them or not is anybody's guess.

    27. Re:Deliver or get sued by sjames · · Score: 1

      THAT is something where they could lose in a lawsuit.

    28. Re:Deliver or get sued by novakyu · · Score: 1

      Not really, which is why I led with "absent the right clauses in TOS". I don't get paid enough to post on Slashdot to actually go through TOS of a soon-to-be-defunct company offering a service I would never have been interested in.

    29. Re:Deliver or get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's always harm. If nothing else, some of the subscribers financed their purchase through credit cards at varying rates and this pro-rated refund isn't going to address the fact that someone has already paid interest on this.

      And there's the value of the exchange. Users weren't paying cash for tickets. Users were paying cash plus personal information for tickets. The fee is a known and easily quantifiable part of the equation, the potential value of the deal is something that could at least be estimated. The user data is something that Moviepass thought was worth enough that, when coupled with the fee, would be more than the potential ticket payout.

      Moviepass has been unilaterally changing that deal to be cash plus personal information for less and less and less. Now they're saying fine, you can have what's left of your cash back but we've got your information and we're keeping it (which was the true value, the thing we thought would subsidize our low-cost offering). Was the info worth as much as they thought it would be? No. Probably not. But that doesn't mean they get to ixnay the deal because they feel the deal isn't profitable for them.

      The risk factor is part of the bargain. Moviepass took a risk that the data they could collect would be worth more than the tickets they had to pay for and that the fees would give them enough cashflow to handle the tickets. Users looked at the same deal and felt the tradeoff was worth it (after all, their theater already has this same information on them, and more, so why not double dip and sell the information twice?)

      Moviepass was wrong and keeps re-writing the deal. Moviepass was the sophisticated entity that preyed on customers. Moviepass drafted the initial terms. Customers never had leverage to renegotiate, and won't get any justice especially since the company will go under before serious litigation can commence.

        Even if they did have a blanket indemnity, the courts could overlook that. You think that if they had cancelled service on day 2 and kept all the money, the courts would just roll over because there's an escape clause saying service could be terminated for whatever reason? Like "Oh man! They sure got you rubes good, agreeing to give them all that money, and then they cancelled it fair and square!"

    30. Re:Deliver or get sued by torkus · · Score: 1

      Oh please.

      First off, no blood from a stone. MP (well, parent company) simply does not have the money to pay out anything substantive in a class action. Lawyers would probably get a few mil for their time and everyone else would get a 'i got f'ed by MP' sticker in the mail.

      Besides that, essentially no one who used MP lost out. Seeing one single movie more than covered the monthly MP sub cost is almost every circumstance. Did they not get what was promised? Yep. No argument there. But financial 'damage' to people who saved money by using MP? Get off it.

      MP is certainly a mess. No arguments there at all. But ... whatever. It was an amazing deal while it lasted. The only people I'd say are legitimately due refunds are of $cost of tickets bought via MP $paid to MP. Everyone else saved money...and none of it was done to trick them out of $ and run away.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
  6. Doesn't matter, going bankrupt regardless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The stock is trading at 2 cents from a high of just under $10,000 after accounting for all the reverse splits. Might as well take the money and leave they won't be around in 9 months.

    1. Re:Doesn't matter, going bankrupt regardless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      There's also other options now that are more likely to be around in the future. Now that they've proven there's a market, the theater chains are starting to offer the same thing. And they'll likely be able to make it work as most screenings have a bunch of empty seats after the opening week. Filling any of those seats is more or less pure profit.

    2. Re:Doesn't matter, going bankrupt regardless by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Filling any of those seats is more or less pure profit.

      Well, make up your mind, man! Is it more pure profit or less pure profit?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re:Doesn't matter, going bankrupt regardless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Filling any of those seats is more or less pure profit.

      Filling an empty seat for peanuts devalues all seats (not that they aren't overvalued as it stands or that the movie industry doesn't need to die in whatever fire happens to be convenient, but...). The amount of customers you add by offering a half-price ticket would never offset the amount of people who were going to pay full price anyway but will now wait a week or two to see it for cheap.

    4. Re: Doesn't matter, going bankrupt regardless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I usually fill the adjacent seat with trash, cups, at least one liquid spill, some spilled popcorn, some smeared nacho cheese, and a few pieces of toilet paper smeared with part of a melted Anickers Bar.

    5. Re: Doesn't matter, going bankrupt regardless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is good for the theaters. Theaters keep a higher percentage of the ticket price the longer a movie is out.

  7. It's dead Jim by TomBauserman · · Score: 1

    At this point they should just throw in the towel. Instead they just keep making themselves look worse. If anybody involved in this tries to start another company people are going to steer clear.

    1. Re:It's dead Jim by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      No, people involved in this now have startup experience and will be chosen as new executives over lesser people who actually have clues. At least this is how it has worked in the past, and I see no evidence that investors have gotten wiser over the years.

  8. This is ridiculus by stikves · · Score: 5, Informative

    They obviously do not want to file for bankruptcy. However at this point it looks like the best action to stop the suffering.

    Their business plan relied on people not using their service. However it being "too good to be true", people actually wanted to use the subscription to the fullest. If you let people to watch one movie every day of the year, there would be people who would want to watch one movie per day. Not everyone is a family with kids with very little time, and can only go to theaters a few times a year. Many people, do have the time to go to the movies.

    Sorry but your plan would have never worked, it failed miserably in the real life. Just accept it.

    1. Re:This is ridiculus by Entrope · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even more relevant, the people who have the most free time -- teens and young adults with no kids -- are also the prime consumers of the product.

      It was glaringly obvious from the start that they were promising more than the industry could afford to deliver at those prices.

    2. Re: This is ridiculus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As usual, the Greedy American killed it. It wasn't enough to see a few movies a month. Had to be a dozen+, while they shoveled butter slathered popcorn down their pieholes

    3. Re: This is ridiculus by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Had to be a dozen+, while they shoveled butter slathered popcorn down their pieholes.

      Well, make up your mind, man! Is it popcornholes or pieholes?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    4. Re:This is ridiculus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was too easy to abuse. With 1 movie a day you can bet people bought the plan and on the days they were not watching a movie, sold that day's pass to someone.

        If I still worked at the arcade near my cinema. Friend stops by, I give them they card, I get $5 and they bring back card before the movie starts. make $150 a month.

    5. Re:This is ridiculus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was glaringly obvious from the start that they were promising more than the industry could afford to deliver at those prices.

      Well . . . . DUH!

      This is such an obviously stupid and unworkable idea that I have zero sympathy for anyone who signed up for the full yearly subscription and is now getting screwed.

    6. Re:This is ridiculus by Kenja · · Score: 1

      Then they needed a better business plan than "sell 10$ for 5$".

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    7. Re: This is ridiculus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Abuse aside, seeing even 1 movie a month would be sufficient to put them in the red. And if you're not going to see at least that many movies, why pay for the pass?

      Abuse, as in sharing cards, just sped up the process.

    8. Re: This is ridiculus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you mean like sell $20 for $1 ?

    9. Re:This is ridiculus by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Sure, they lose money on every sale but they're hoping to make it up in volume.

    10. Re:This is ridiculus by Darinbob · · Score: 1, Interesting

      If they signed up for a year, for $89, and they saw 8 movies or more then they got their money's worth. I don't think they're getting screwed. These customers presumably imagined originally that they were screwing MoviePass.

    11. Re:This is ridiculus by Greyfox · · Score: 1
      No it wouldn't. The suffering is actually more entertaining than most of the movies we would have gone to see anyway. Everyone should just tell them "Keep going, Movie Pass! You can do it!" and pop up some more popcorn to eat while watching them flail about trying to make it work.

      I wouldn't work for 'em at this point, though. I'd' be surprised if the payroll checks haven't already started bouncing.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    12. Re: This is ridiculus by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I fail entirely to see the link between watching films and shovelling butter slathered popcorn.

      I watch over a dozen movies every month and I haven't eaten popcorn for over two decades.

      My choice of where and how to watch films includes cost, availability, convenience and other factors. Being able to see films in a cinema for less than the cost of my TV movie channel subscription would indeed be highly attractive, entirely rational and completely unlinked to anything you could describe as 'greed'.

      So no, "the Greedy American" didn't kill it. The stupid, unaffordable and unsustainable business model killed it.

    13. Re:This is ridiculus by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      These customers presumably imagined originally that they were screwing MoviePass.

      Screwing, maybe. Screwing over? Not at all. They were using the service as it was advertised. This is no different from cellphone companies that sold unlimited plans and then altered the deal so that they were in fact limited. However, since they are offering a pro-rated refund, the only real problem IMO is that they're only offering a week to claim it. Is that even legal?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:This is ridiculus by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It was glaringly obvious from the start that they were promising more than the industry could afford to deliver at those prices.

      No, it wasn't obvious. There's lots of empty theater seats. Every empty seat represents a lost opportunity to sell overpriced snacks, distributors pay theaters for showing trailers based on how many people see them, and theaters pay distributors a percentage of ticket revenues at the end of a run. We've been told for years that theaters don't make much from showing films, but instead profit mainly from selling food, so getting more asses in seats seemed like a feasible way for them to increase revenues. The only way moviepass doesn't make sense is if they are actually having to pay for tickets ahead of time, which itself doesn't make any sense.

      Theater chains are now getting into the moviepass act themselves, essentially, so clearly they feel the concept has legs so long as it's run correctly.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:This is ridiculus by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      No, it wasn't obvious. There's lots of empty theater seats. Every empty seat represents a lost opportunity to sell overpriced snacks, distributors pay theaters for showing trailers based on how many people see them, and theaters pay distributors a percentage of ticket revenues at the end of a run. We've been told for years that theaters don't make much from showing films, but instead profit mainly from selling food, so getting more asses in seats seemed like a feasible way for them to increase revenues. The only way moviepass doesn't make sense is if they are actually having to pay for tickets ahead of time, which itself doesn't make any sense.

      Theater chains are now getting into the moviepass act themselves, essentially, so clearly they feel the concept has legs so long as it's run correctly.

      Every empty seat is a lost opportunity to sell snacks, yes, but not everyone buys snacks. So it's a lost opportunity for a few dollars plus trailers and other ads. Let's say that cost is $X.

      For a first run movie, an empty seat costs the theatre $0. But if it was occupied, then the theatre pays full ticket price to the studio and makes on average, $X.

      So if the seat is empty, it costs the theatre nothing to the studio to play a movie to the seat, but the theatre loses out on the money they would've made.

      Now let's say you offer a discounted ticket for a movie. The theatre still has to pay the full ticket price for the now-occupied seat, and they make the $X on concessions and stuff, plus whatever they made on the discounted ticket.Obviously if the combined amount is lower than the full ticket price, the theatre will prefer the seat empty as they won't lose money.

      And you have to remember, with ticket prices at $12 or so, it takes a LOT of concessions to make that up. Even if the tickets were half price at $6, that still takes a lot of concessions - an individual might make the theatre more than $6, but then 9 other moviegoers don't stop at the concession stand so it's spread out to a measly 60 cents per seat.

      The plans theaters put together are different - while MoviePass aimed at trying to give you unlimited movies, all the other measures were far more limited - AMC gives you 3 movies and costs twice as much a month.

      And no doubt, they'll start "priming the pump" by adding features like a free small popcorn with every movie, triggering a soda sale at the very least, and probably sales of more popcorn if you went out with friends.(Expect to see the ability to combine those three tickets into a group of three tickets if seen during off peak times so you and two friends can see the same movie. And one free popcorn for you, to trigger a sale of soda and probably more ocncessions to your snack-less friends).

  9. I am altering the deal, pray I don't alter it any by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    So Movie Pass has gone all Darth Vader - "I am altering the deal, pray I don't alter it any further"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsW9MlYu31g

  10. Re:I am altering the deal, pray I don't alter it a by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Going by the number of times they've done that, I'd say Movie Pass has gone Robot Chicken.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  11. 9 months? Who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cancel and get your money back while you can. Movie Pass most likely wonâ(TM)t make it another 9 weeks

  12. You really want to sit in a fat lady's fart seat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you can do a demand view for far less. Support your local cable company, and sit in your own fart seat.

  13. Re:WTF FOMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you having a stroke?

  14. Bait and switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is illegal

  15. Re:You really want to sit in a fat lady's fart sea by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    You really want to sit through unwanted ads and pay every time you want a movie on demand?

    Support Netflix and skip your local cable company.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  16. Re:Momma' said, if it sounds too good to be true.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is, if you see one movie a month, they barely break even. Any more than that and they lose money. Movie Pass's business model literally *DEPENDS* on people paying for it but not using it. It is the only way for them to be profitable.

    Movie Pass is not a serious business. It was never started with the intention of long term operation. It's the old dot-com-bubble-1.0 business model from the late 90s, early 2000s:

    (1) Start a bullshit company whose business doesn't really make any sense
    (2) Get bought out by someone
    (3) PROFIT!!

  17. Re: Momma' said, if it sounds too good to be true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I signed up when it first came out, took 5 weeks for the card to show up. And even before that came I saw they were already stopping my movie theater from pre ordering . So I actually cancelled my subscription before the card showed up

  18. Re: You really want to sit in a fat lady's fart se by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except Netflix shows ads now.

  19. Release the Kraken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Err, I mean lawyers ...

  20. Who would back this company to begin with? by 0x537461746943 · · Score: 1

    I don't understand how someone could ever think this could work. Of course they can't keep this up where someone could go see 30 movies a month for $10. It almost makes me think there is some kind of shadiness going on. Someone create a big company that people love... knowing that it is not sustainable... get financial backing because of how popular it certainly would be... cash out before it tanks... go to Disney World.

    1. Re:Who would back this company to begin with? by Voyager529 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't understand how someone could ever think this could work.

      They were depending on people like me. See, I subscribe to Netflix...but I watch approximately 20 hours a year, so Netflix makes a solid profit margin on me. There are probably enough Netflix subscribers like me where the binge watchers are subsidized, and it all evens out because both of us want to pay a flat rate.

      The problem Moviepass had was that they lacked balance. People like me weren't going to sign up because the half-a-dozen times a year I go to the movies is about the same cost as an annual Moviepass subscription - I'd have to go to the movies more often to justify it. The people who were going to jump on the deal were the people who were already going to the movies very regularly, so selling them movie tickets for less than half of what they were already paying just wasn't going to go their way.

      Moviepass could have fared better if they limited themselves from the beginning - "$10 for 10 movies a month, but while you pick the days, we pick the show times". They could have partnered with the movie theaters to better distribute crowds during off-peak showings and banked on making up the balance at the concession stands, or at least having the seats available during prime time for full-priced customers. It would help limit the exposure of the theaters, it would set an expectation, and could be beneficial for everyone involved.

      I'm unsurprised that the service, as advertised, ended up here.

    2. Re:Who would back this company to begin with? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not arguing against your broader point but I would actually guess that most of Netflix's costs are either fixed (costs associated with intellectual property licensing, etc), or roughly scale with the number of subscribers (infrastructure has to be available before people start using it). To wit, a quick search suggests that it costs Netflix 2-10 cents to stream a single movie, so you aren't really subsidizing the heavy streamers as much as you think.

    3. Re:Who would back this company to begin with? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People like me weren't going to sign up because the half-a-dozen times a year I go to the movies is about the same cost as an annual Moviepass subscription - I'd have to go to the movies more often to justify it.

      No, you'd have to imagine going to the movies more often to justify it. This play on betting people not to follow through with their plans works pretty well with gym memberships, for example.

    4. Re:Who would back this company to begin with? by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      The backers were thinking nobody could possibly see the crap that Hollywood puts out every day of the month and lost.

  21. Re:Momma' said, if it sounds too good to be true.. by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

    You forgot 1.a Borrow lots of money from dumb venture capitalists, collect seven figure salary for the few years their still stupid enough to lend you money.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  22. Re:You really want to sit in a fat lady's fart sea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Support Netflix and skip your local cable company.

    People keep saying that while ignoring the fact that the local cable company is the only practical source for internet connectivity. The more people dump cable, the more they jack up the price to access the internet.

    While I'm sure they would prefer that customers keep cable so they can continue to gouge for unwanted channels, the cable companies will have their pound of flesh.

    (Full disclosure: I dropped cable about twenty years ago. Too many ads, the same shows on multiple channels, too many ads, too many channels of crap I didn't want but had to pay for for the few shows I found interesting, too many ads, cropped programs when full widescreen versions could be had on DVD with no ads, and did I mention too many --ing ads? I haven't missed it.)

  23. If they give you a full refund by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    you'll have a hard time convincing a judge. I suppose if you got a really good lawyer and class action, but they're teetering on the verge of collapse. Go ahead and sue, you won't get a dime or your movies. Heck, I don't think you could find a lawyer to take a case unless you paid them up front since they've got to know Movie Pass doesn't have money to pay out settlements. And you'd just be out the $50k. Plus you'd have to find a shady lawyer since better ones would tell you you're not gonna get paid.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:If they give you a full refund by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      No, he's got it all wrong. The way it works in American and most countries is, "you deliver or I get my money back". The lawyers only come into play if you don't get the money back.

    2. Re:If they give you a full refund by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      And for the amounts of money in this case your lawyer will get your money back and charge you for the experience.

  24. Why does this company get so much media attention? by skam240 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why does this company get so much media attention? The second I heard about what it was offering and at what prices I immediately began thinking "90's tech boom bullshit". Remember the company that wanted to make a business out of home delivery of pet food and even aired super bowl commercials? Movie Pass just seemed like more of that to me.

    I mean, unlimited movies a month for the price of one movie of month? Guess who's going to sign up for that! People who see more than one movie a month or want to. Guess who isn't going to sign up for this? Everyone who doesn't or doesn't want to. The only way this was a money making enterprise is if they got a lot of people to sign up who didn't watch movies very often and most people just aren't that stupid.

    Anybody who put money in any long term manner into such a ridiculously conceived business is too stupid to deserve the money they lost. They might as well have given it to a Nigerian prince.

    --
    I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
  25. only idiots thought this idea was sustainable as i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was doomed from the start. Only smart investors made money on this with a "first out" option. All others including the retards doing the work who will learn that you should work for free for a startup, will get nothing in the end. Dumbasses.!

  26. The bitcoin of startups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My $5,000 buyin is gonna pay off any day.

  27. Sued yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why havent they got sued yet. They've literally screwed over their paying customers; they promised them something that they paid for, then took it away. Really, why is this against the law?

  28. They’re altering the deal by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

    Pray they don’t alter it any further.

    --
    Chewbacon
    The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
  29. One good thing came from MoviePass, at least... by WilliamGeorge · · Score: 3, Informative

    AMC Stubs A-List. If you aren't familiar, it is AMC's own version of a subscription plan, and at more survivable pricing. $20 a month for 3 movies a week, for yourself only, with no blackouts or limits on the type of movie (3D, Imax, etc). If you watch even 2 movies a month it should break even, and anything more nets you a savings... while it isn't so dirt cheap that it will kill AMC. I would love it if they'd add an upgrade for another, say, $10 a month that would allow you to use the 3-per-week to cover others (as long as you were with them)... but that may be more niche than they want to go, or it might not be justified price-wise. If I take my family to the movies, AMC still gets a lot of month (wife + 3 kids) even if my ticket is already covered under the A-List plan. Plus any food we buy. I don't think AMC would have come up with this idea if it weren't for the competition from MoviePass.

    --
    William George
    1. Re:One good thing came from MoviePass, at least... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They would have eventually. Those kind of plans are available for several years now in Poland. You pay equivalent of ~5 movies a month, and you get mostly unlimited goings.

    2. Re:One good thing came from MoviePass, at least... by WilliamGeorge · · Score: 1

      Oh, interesting! I am not well read about things like this outside the US. Interestingly, the AMC A-List thing is only about the cost of 2 tickets a month... which is why I could justify it. Prior to joining I only saw about 2 movies a month, sometimes less.

      I wonder if they will see the failure of MoviePass as a chance to (slowly) increase the price of A-List over time? The cost of 5 tickets a month would be closer to $50 or $60 most places here in the US, maybe even more if you figure in the higher price of premium movies (Imax, 3D, etc).

      --
      William George
  30. The worst part to me is no aftercare by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    If there were actually people that watched what Hollywood is putting out every day, they obviously at this point are in dire need of medical attention. Where will the funding for that come from if MoviePass declares bankruptcy?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  31. Re:Momma' said, if it sounds too good to be true.. by uncqual · · Score: 2

    Agreed - but it is possible to believe there is a MoviePass model that works by selling the data about what movies you watch, or selling highly targeted ads (esp. to movies) based on what you watch and generating revenue from that.

    One problem with the highly targeted movie ads revenue stream is if the ads are successful you will go see a movie you wouldn't have otherwise. Now if this replaced another movie you would have seen, one studio/producer gets one more movie view that another studio/producer lost and your decision is revenue neutral to MP (unless you would have originally gone to a cheap movie theater to see a second run movie and instead went to a full price theater to see the advertised "blockbuster") but they get to keep the ad revenue and that studio/producer (or others) will continue to buy ads due to their success. However if you see the movie in addition to other movies, MP pays for the movie and there's no possibility in a sustainable model that MP would routinely get more for the ads than what they pay for movie.

    Another source of anticipated revenue could be the 'gym membership' phenomena -- you sign up and (maybe) use it for a short time and then stop going but just let auto debit continue. However, gym memberships have a sticky attribute in this case -- cancelling makes the person admit that they really are NOT going to start working out which is something they obviously thought they should do. People tend to be somewhat resistant to openly admitting (even to themselves) that they are unlikely to do what they know they should be doing and cancelling makes the person take that step. I don't think MoviePass has this level of stickiness -- the most you have to do is acknowledge that you thought you would see more movies if they were "free", but it turns out you just don't have the time to do so or discovered there aren't enough movies you want to see to make MP attractive -- that's an analytical decision that doesn't cast "moral" aspersions back on yourself.

    --
    Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
  32. Dang by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

    I swear every time I hear something about this company it keeps getting worse and worse.

    I fully expect that in another month or two they'll be charging you $50 per month and you can only watch a single movie a month that you still have to pay full price for. Any additional viewings you have to pay full price and a $15 fee back to Moviepass . . .

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  33. Still A Good Deal by rally2xs · · Score: 1

    I bought an annual plan last March. I see a LOT of movies. Made my money back in about 6 weeks. Have dramatically exceeded my investment in subsequent savings. If I still get 3 movies a month, I'll STILL make $$$ compared to not having it, since I will for-sure see those 3 movies - I see 3 - 5 movies a week depending on new availability and whether I want to see a particularly good movie a 2nd or more times. OK, I'm retired and have the time, and I'm ancient and get the senior price. But even under the new terms, I'm better off with it that without it.

    Probably re-up for a year when the current subscription runs out, if they indeed have an annual plan by that time, which I guess was implied by some of the postings here that they won't, although I didn't get that out of the email I read. Maybe I didn't read it carefully enough. But anyway, I'd like to see them get their act together on this seemingly impossible task and actually deliver something close to what they said they were shooting for. I'm betting I'll save some $$$.

    1. Re:Still A Good Deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a classic Ponzi to me - early adopters make a killing, latecomers lose out

  34. What a reversal by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 1

    "Unlimited movies - any movie, any time."
    ...but now only 3 movies a month, not 30. And only certain movies are available, our choice. And when everybody really wants to go, we'll tell you to pick another time. And if you already paid and want what you paid for and what we promised when we took your money, fuck off, because our business model was a lie and we'll be dead soon anyway. It's your fault for actually trying to use the service you paid for, you freeloaders.

    It did indeed sound too good to be true, and the naysayers were right - it was.

    --
    This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
  35. Re:MightyMartian = fake name massive human fail by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    Do your parents know you're insane?

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  36. Re:Why does this company get so much media attenti by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Why does this company get so much media attention?

    Because few companies make a business plan of actively trying to get stabbed in the heart with a wooden steak and then having people throw salt on the corpse while chanting and holding a bible.

    I mean I've seen self destructive practices now, but at this point the question is do they file for chapter 11 by themselves, do they file because the cinemas come collecting, or do they file because of a class action.

  37. If you were to look at their financials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moviepass is imploding financially to the tune of 186M$ of debt. You'd be stupid to say this isn't in the best interest of the customers, because they won't exist in their current condition or they won't exist at all. At this point, as a customer, I'd rather be able to see some movies for the subscription, vs no movies if I paid the annual charge. I'm willing to be that most are in monthly anyway

  38. I have altered the deal, pray that I dont alter it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This Deal's Getting Worse All The Time!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpE_xMRiCLE

  39. Re:Why does this company get so much media attenti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I shop for pet food sometimes from a company that does home delivery, and it works very well.

  40. When is a contract not a contract? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently when we say so.
    The fact that these guys can so change the deal and not be gone is just wrong.

    It highlights the bigger problem of Terms of Service contracts these days.
    As in take it or leave it, and if you take it we reserve the right to completely change the rules tomorrow.

  41. Re:Why does this company get so much media attenti by Cederic · · Score: 1

    Remember the company that wanted to make a business out of home delivery of pet food and even aired super bowl commercials?

    No. Was it this one? https://www.petplanet.co.uk/se...

    This one? https://fetch.co.uk/

    Maybe this one? https://www.zooplus.co.uk/

    Perhaps one of these?
    https://www.bitiba.co.uk/
    https://www.pet-supermarket.co...
    https://www.monsterpetsupplies...

    Or maybe there is a market there, and well run companies with appropriate business understanding can sustainably meet customer needs and make a profit by servicing it.

    Much like the film market. People want to watch films, someone offered a deal that let them see a lot of films very cheaply, they got excited about it and the media noticed lots of excited people.

    If anything the unsustainable business model merely increased the media interest. People like a bit of drama, like a popular service predictably breaking.

  42. Re:MightyMartian = fake name massive human fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Listen here, Donald... I don't give a fuck that you're an embarrassment to your country. I find your insane rantings on twitter mildly amusing. But do you have to fuck up Slashdot too? For reals, can't you get a couple of your secret service nazis to find you something to do other than blather on here? Just a little advice from your more-mentally-stable neighbors to the north: Step away from the keyboard and seek the help of a qualified mental health expert. Asshole.

  43. Re:Why does this company get so much media attenti by Ramze · · Score: 1

    The only prayer for them to survive was to have such a vast membership that they could mine them for data to sell and/or control the flow of people to movie theaters in such a way that they became the middle-men that theaters would have to partner with and give discounts towards.

    They knew they were going to burn through a LOT of cash before that scenario could happen, but they didn't have deep enough pockets to actually make it happen. They came close at one point.

    Not only was the business model so shady that everyone took notice, the CEO kept giving rosy best-case scenarios for profitability that made no sense because they didn't take into account some very basic business principles like adverse selection.

  44. Re:Why does this company get so much media attenti by skam240 · · Score: 1

    "The only prayer for them to survive was to have such a vast membership that they could mine them for data to sell and/or control the flow of people to movie theaters in such a way that they became the middle-men that theaters would have to partner with and give discounts towards."

    That's only possible if theaters figure out a way to monetize whatever data they might get from them which is not a guarantee at all. Really they'd have to be able to make a shit ton of money off user data to make up for the necessarily large MoviePass user base that would be needed in this scenario and off the top of my head I don't see how that would work.

    --
    I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
  45. Re:MightyMartian = fake name massive human fail by novakyu · · Score: 1

    My guess: "Yes".

  46. Re:WTF FOMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you retarded?
    stfu esad & s my d = Shut The Fuck Up Eat Shit And Die & Suck my Dick.
    You only need about a room temperature IQ to get that.

  47. Re:MightyMartian = fake name massive human fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You post.....that.....completely offtopic, mind you, about MightyMartian's butthurt and blatherings.....yet you don't see the irony.

    Even if you were a computing genius-god, which you're most definitely not, your social and logical skills are so far into the negatives it more than negates your own perception of your computing intelligence.

  48. The Annual Debacle by Xnet+Project · · Score: 1

    This has been the issue with annual subscriptions as a whole for services for such as MoviePass for some time now. Amazon has even moved to a month-to-month basis on subscription services as a more viable solution for subscription services.

  49. Re:Momma' said, if it sounds too good to be true.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know how the people who started movie pass thought this was going to work in an industry that thinks charging $10 for popcorn is going to keep customers coming back.

  50. "Server Error"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when trying to get to the place to cancel in the app per this

  51. Profit from each customer by AlejandroTejadaC · · Score: 1

    How could MoviePass receive a profit from every customer? Selling articles and events (at a profit) to each one of their own customers.