Should moviegoers pay for 3-D glasses?
One major movie studio has said it will stop footing the bill for 3-D glasses next year. So who picks up the cost?
Sony Pictures Entertainment has said it will stop paying for 3-D glasses by next May, and other studios are likely considering the same thing, according to The Hollywood Reporter. It can cost a studio as much as $10 million to provide 3-D glasses for each blockbuster movie.
So who's going to pay for those glasses now? The burden shifts to theater owners, and they're not happy about it at all. Regal Entertainment (RGC), which saw its stock price drop more than 8% this week, warned studios this week that it may show fewer 3-D films as a result.
"We would be forced to evaluate this new economic model and program our screens accordingly," Regal said in a statement.
Director James Cameron thinks all films will be in 3-D in a few years. Check out his comments in the following video.
Post continues after video:
Sony suggested that theaters charge customers for the glasses, and allow them to re-use the glasses at other movies. That's the way they do it in Europe, where a pair of glasses costs about $1.36, the AP reports. Besides, it's better for the environment, Sony added.
Customers already have to pay more for a 3-D ticket, largely because theater owners have paid to convert their screens to 3-D. Will moviegoers accept another $2 or $3 charge for glasses, especially after getting them for free for years?
The controversy comes as 3-D appears to be losing steam in the U.S. Audience enthusiasm for 3-D movies has waned lately. Maybe that extra $3 to $5 in ticket price has something to do with it.
About 85% of domestic box office revenue for "Avatar" was from 3-D in 2009, according to The New York Times. But that dropped to only 47% for "Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides."
Perhaps people felt that 3-D just wasn't necessary for every film. After all, many of them weren't filmed with 3-D cameras, but were later converted into 3-D.
Asking moviegoers to pay for their own 3-D glasses isn't going to help ticket sales one bit.
Hey all the blind people running movie theatres I have a tip for you!
Afraid that your market share is drying up? People not going to the theatre like they've done in the past? They're renting instead?
STOP PRICING THEM OUT OF YOUR THEATRE! I would go out to the movies once a week if I could afford it. I used to do it all the time, I enjoyed it! But then you started to charge two or three times more for a single ticket, than it costs to rent a dvd that my whole family can watch. $6 for a SMALL popcorn (butter EXTRA), $4 and up for a box of candy I could buy for 75 CENTS in any CVS, $5 for a MEDIUM pop when I could buy 4 two litters for that much!
For cripes sake! Start using some common sense! If you advertised that your theatre charged HALF what other theatres charged for their concessions you'd have more people coming to YOUR theatre and buying from YOUR concession stand. And you'd be selling out and still making a decent profit, instead of it going stale on your shelves while people snuck their food in!
"I think in our romance with technology, and our excitement at exploring all the possibilities of film and video, I think we've particularly lost something that we now have to reclaim. I think it's time to renew our romance with the word." -- Steven Spielberg
He's takling about the script, It's time to get back to well-written scripts and good, solid stories.
If 3D died tomorrow, I couldn't care less.
Don't know where this author is from but you pay extra for the glasses here $3.00 a person and have been for YEARS!
We kept ours for the next movie we went to see that was 3D last year...and were told we would have to pay the $3.00 AGAIN even if we brought in our OWN glasses (and that is on top of the extra movie price)
Our Solution? We stopped going to the movies altogether and just watch the oldies on Netflix or rent them from Redbox. Carmike theater gets no more money from us.... and guess what ..we haven't missed a thing.
The kids didn't even want to see the latest Harry Potter movie.. said they would rather wait until it comes out on DVD... and enjoy it at home with their own snacks and relaxing on the couch.
And for us - a movie night at the theater is MORE than the cost of buying the movie or the blue-ray. NOT counting popcorn OR the glasses. The kids (who are all older now) said they won't pay to go to the movies with their friends either that it just costs way too much.
Now that they have to work for their money (just like we do) they all have realized the cost of goods and services and they too have chosen to not spend their money on that form of entertainment anymore either.
That is the only way this will change if people choose not to pay for it or go to the movies.
Hey hollywood the movies that you guys have been coming out with really SUCK!!!! So no wonder you want to charge for the glasses. (your movies aren't cutting the bills)
maybe they should take the $10 million they say it's costing them to supply 3D glasses out of the obscene salaries the actors are paid
So the answer to a slagging 3-D market is to up the prices?
I've been avoiding 3-D whenever possible - I think Avatar may have been the last one I went to in 3-D...primarily because the only 2-D showing was in the middle of the work day around here.
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
The NBA star could receive as much as $300 million in the 10-year deal, according to reports.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
Top Stocks provides analysis about the most noteworthy stocks in the market each day, combining some of the best content from around the MSN Money site and the rest of the Web.
Contributors include professional investors and journalists affiliated with MSN Money.
Follow us on Twitter @topstocksmsn.