Screening Room Didn’t ‘Get a Lot of Traction,’ Movie Theater Trade Group Says

Screening Room Didn't 'Get a Lot
Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP

The Screening Room isn’t riding to movie theaters’ rescue. It’s part of an effort to bolster a sagging home entertainment market, according to executives at the National Association of Theatre Owners.

“Any talk about shortening the window is not in order to benefit the theatrical market … it is because of the difficulties in the home [entertainment] market,” Patrick Corcoran, vice president and chief communications officer for the exhibition industry trade association, said at the Gabelli movie and entertainment conference on Thursday.

He noted that the domestic box office reached a record $11 billion last year, but that the home entertainment industry, weighed down by the collapse of DVD sales and rentals, has lost $6 billion in revenue since 2005.

Screening Room, a startup backed by Sean Parker of Facebook and Napster fame and Prem Akkaraju, is trying to capture an older audience they claim is not going to movie theaters. The company is offering new theatrical releases in the home for $50 a rental. To interest exhibitors and studios in the initiative, they plan to share the profits with both groups. But Corcoran suggested that their pitch is falling on deaf ears. AMC, the country’s second largest chain, is backing Screening Room, but no studios or other major theater groups are supporting the technology.


Screening Room Study: Interest Is High, But Price Is a Problem

“It got a lot of attention in the press, but it didn’t get a lot of traction in the industry itself,” said Corcoran.

NATO has no official position on Screening Room, but Corcoran said that it was critical that the industry protect the “exclusivity” of the theatrical release window. The fact that audiences can only access certain movies in theaters for a select period of time is a major reason that they continue to draw crowds.

As the home entertainment industry constricts, the Chinese marketplace continues to expand at a dazzling clip. Ticket sales in the Middle Kingdom grew 49%, hitting $6.8 billion. Analysts expect that China will surpass the U.S. as the top market for film by 2017.

However, only a small percentage of those riches are reaching studios, Corcoran argued. He noted that China is dependent on local producers for the bulk of their films. Domestically, the seven top studios, a group that includes Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros., account for 90% of theatrical revenue. In China, they are responsible for 38.5% of the market share. Moreover, because of Chinese regulations, Hollywood companies can only take out 25% of revenues out of the country. That means that despite the record ticket sales, China only contributed $650 million to major studios in 2015.

“While China is important … it’s still not anywhere near what they’re getting domestically,” said Corcoran.

Hollywood’s attraction to China extends beyond its massive population of moviegoers. Chinese firms and companies such as Dalian Wanda, Alibaba, and Studio 8 have partnered with the biggest studios or invested in their slates in some capacity.

“It should be taken as a vote of confidence in the power of Hollywood to create global products,” said Phil Contrino, data research manager at NATO.

Beyond China and Sean Parker, Corcoran argued that concerns that younger consumers are rejecting movies for digital forms of entertainment are overblown. Teenagers over-index in terms of their attendance, representing 8% of the population, while buying 16% of movie tickets, he said. Studies show that this audience segment has declined in recent years, but Corcoran suggested that the problem was with the surveys themselves. He noted that younger consumers don’t have landlines, making them hard to poll.

“They are not only hard to reach in terms of marketing, but they are hard to reach in surveying behavior,” said Corcoran.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 3

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. A Movie Lover says:

    Greed is the reason this isnt going to be the average consumer type product. I love watching movies, but i hate people, so i dont go to theatres often. Ill wait until i can watch it at home before dealing with crowds of people. I can see paying $20 for the convienence, but not much more from that. Wouldn’t it be better to get $20 a household ratger than nothing? People download things illegally every day, hut i bet if they had the option to see a new movie in HD legitimately, they’d pay for it without thinking twice. I know it takes a lot of work to make a movie, but making millions is not justification to charge uber amounts. The greedy should really think the income of middle America and think hiw much it costs to live. Taking all of that into consideration, movies are a luxury people just arent willing to splurge on anymore. Think, 1 household will have 3+ people making a sungle trip close to $50 not uncluding concession. Add any concession and that amount easily doubles. If a household has more than 1 child, that amount will easily increase by 20% per additional head. With consistency of cost if EVERYTHING going up in America EXCEPT pay, movies are a luxury mist camnot afford nowadays.

  2. Ben says:

    Screening Room has been dead in the water from the start.
    Anyone with more common sense than greed could see that.

    It is just a matter of time before this idea folds up, even if they modify the idea, there are already dish, cable and streaming options at every turn to provide movies. And this one wants you to have another box, and pay a high price per movies. It is dead, very dead.

  3. John says:

    Actually Hollywood studios receive an average of 7% film rental on their movie released in China. So all the recent record breaking boxoffice in China may seem impressive on paper, in reality the studios probably still lose money in China.

    Plus Chinese boxoffice reporting system are never accurate. Theaters in China have a common practice, that is, when an audience go purchase ticket for a Hollywood movie, say Captain America Civil War, the ticket agent at the counter would print out admission for a Chinese movie, “cross out” the title, then write the Hollywood movie title on that ticket. So even though the audience would be watching Captain America Civil War, the money in fact went to the Chinese movie the admission ticket was originally printed out. Very shady.

More Film News from Variety