/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>16671289
How is this even legal?

>>16671289
Unironically yes if they didn't go for just mainstream fair and instead targeted people who want to see live broadcasts of events (international sports, one-night only big name shows - things which are better seen in crowds) but also catered to Bollywood, Opera and High Income Baby Boomers who are very lucrative cinema markets. Think about the kind of people who see Helen Miriam films or The Favourite. But also Andre Rieu, bus in a bunch of bluehairs and you've made a killing, especially for a chain like this where they can have their meal as part of a package day out tour.

>>16671289
Looks like some boomers won't be getting a pension after all

>>16671313
Good question. I don't know. The quick run down I read on wsj was that they have been pouring money into this since 07. The company finally went bankrupt and delisted from stock exchange so they made an offer to buy it outright. To be fair this is only a fraction of a percent of the $40 billion that the fund has in total assets under management. Pic related was the owner of iPic who dumped his bags on boomers.
>>16671367
This sounds like a decent strat. Instead they are banking on the new Star Wars right now.

>>16671313
this is why I consider finance a scam industry, some boomer bureaucrats probably sold the pension thinking it was a good deal. I'm sure the hedge fund in charge of this paid out millions to all the con artists that work there

>>16671289
That's nearly $14m per location

>>16671375
What a sleazy champ that guy is!
>Instead they are banking on the new Star Wars right now.
Yep, obviously their 'meat and vegs' will come from the Disney and mainstream films, but their 'gravy' or their high margin profits is going to come from specialty or package deals.

>>16671406
The latest star wars is averaging 20k a theater and it's been out for a week (not sure how much that is per screen), multiply that by 52 weeks, add all the other films they play across the year, how does that sound?

>>16671375
>>16671458
I didn't clarify, their strategy of focusing JUST on Mainstream films is shit

Thank you Goyim, rest in piss

>>16671458
>20k x 52 weeks = ~$1.4m per year
>the theater will have to maintain 20k per week at a 100% post tax profit rate for 10 years with no inflation on the dollar before it makes back its investment

>>16671515
They play more than one film a week at a location...

>>16671289
Boomers: BTFO and JUSTed

>>16671375
Why do all boomers look dead in the eyes? Was it the years spent in front of the idiot tube that sucked their souls out?

Alamo draft house? Solid concept the one in dtla is sick

>>16671557
Let's assume that the number one film generates 80% of a movie theater's return at any given time, pretty standard Pareto distribution.
That brings the number up to ~1.9m per year if you round up.
Which means it still takes about 7.5 years maintaining that rate at a 100% post tax profit rate with no inflation before it makes back its investment.

no one really gives a fuck about ipic here in CA. which is why they went bankrupt. the popular luxury theater is cinepolis. in general a cold beer, fries + movie is best combo. fancy finger foods are pretty unnecessary. back when i used to go to the movies, for me it was arclight.

The SEC unironically needs to investigate this. Clearly something sketchy is going on.

>>16671721
>Let's assume that the number one film generates 80% of a movie theater's return at any given time, pretty standard Pareto distribution.
That's an innacurate assumption though. Go on Box Office Mojo and pull up some numbers then we'll talk.
Highest average today is '1917', it played at only 11 theatres and made 22k average. Your assumption is way off.

who the hell still goes to the movies?

>>16671367
>Andre Rieu
people on this board are *so* lower middle class, disgusting