You’re right, but to the suits: what makes the profit is the drinks and the popcorn. Selling popcorn to a higher percentage of customers will make them more money, even if they sell less tickets, because the tickets don’t make money. Hell, sell less tickets with a higher proportion of popcorn sales and you can probably schedule less people/save on labor.
That may be so, but the popcorn with chemical “pee” has never been what pulls in customers. The movies were always the draw, even if food was the profit. Advertising that food seems short-sighted: who cares if you sell popcorn to a higher percentage of customers but you’re pulling in fewer customers
andros_rex@lemmy.world 1 day ago
IWW4@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
Don’t argue with me man, argue with the chain. They clearly agree with my position.
ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Not really “never”, but the standard movie deals have long called for the studios to get a 90% cut of the box for the first two weeks a movie runs, then it switches to a 50/50 split the rest of the way. Nobody seems to have noticed that this arrangement incentivizes movie studios to produce overhyped pieces of shit so that no good movie with serious staying power cannibalizes their own revenue stream. Just a total coincidence that most movies now are overhyped pieces of shit.