This debate can be cut down to one item. Who will pay for the projectors?
There are generally two types of cinema operators....the small family owned cinema, usually one screen still trying to hold onto a family trait.....or the large multi-screen complexes.
When it comes to digital projectors the single screen cinemas cannot afford to purchase them. The margins are just too tight. Regardless of who you are (most of the time) a film distributor will want 50% - 70% (depending on film) of your ticket sales in the first week decreasing by 10% every week you show the film (that's why they push the popcorn so much).
The cinema business is also reliant on what the film producers make....how many films did you see last year? Or consider films that were "worth" seeing. Not many I bet. The current outlook is good (Spidey, StarWars, Matrix, Terminator, etc), but the future is a time of uncertainty.
Once screen means you can't subsidise a bad film...imagine if you were a small operator and booked something like Waterworld because you believed the hype and thought it would do well. You don't have any other screen to take the flack. You cant switch films as there are only a finite number of copies and they are all rented out for the first 2 weeks and how many people go to see a good film after it has been out 2 weeks.
So if the distributors pay for the system then small operators will survive. I don't even think a middle way will work as the profits are just too tight. The straw that breaks the camels back...probably.
Personally I like the single screen cinemas and will continue to go as long as they are around.
Slashdot Mirror
This debate can be cut down to one item. Who will pay for the projectors?
There are generally two types of cinema operators....the small family owned cinema, usually one screen still trying to hold onto a family trait.....or the large multi-screen complexes.
When it comes to digital projectors the single screen cinemas cannot afford to purchase them. The margins are just too tight. Regardless of who you are (most of the time) a film distributor will want 50% - 70% (depending on film) of your ticket sales in the first week decreasing by 10% every week you show the film (that's why they push the popcorn so much).
The cinema business is also reliant on what the film producers make....how many films did you see last year? Or consider films that were "worth" seeing. Not many I bet. The current outlook is good (Spidey, StarWars, Matrix, Terminator, etc), but the future is a time of uncertainty.
Once screen means you can't subsidise a bad film...imagine if you were a small operator and booked something like Waterworld because you believed the hype and thought it would do well. You don't have any other screen to take the flack. You cant switch films as there are only a finite number of copies and they are all rented out for the first 2 weeks and how many people go to see a good film after it has been out 2 weeks.
So if the distributors pay for the system then small operators will survive. I don't even think a middle way will work as the profits are just too tight. The straw that breaks the camels back...probably.
Personally I like the single screen cinemas and will continue to go as long as they are around.
By its very nature an code of ethics means that you as an employee MAY have issues with what your employer wants you to do.
5 22 2&mode=thread&tid=98
Given the recent market
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/05/06/122
I dont think its in a coders best interest at the moment to be telling the employer what he wants to do.