|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Save America's Cinemas
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Jentsch
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1061
From: New Berlin, WI, USA
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 01-07-2013 01:17 PM
To follow-up on the Save America's Cinemas topic, I actually ran across mentions of the organization while processing information about some of the theaters on their theater list.
It appears that Save America's Cinemas is doling out the money in the form of grants that theaters can apply for, according to this article in the Pierce County Tribune (North Dakota):
quote:
The JDA has applied for a grant through "Save America's Cinemas," an organization that is attempting to raise $1 million to save small-town theaters.
If the grant is accepted, "Save America's Cinemas" would install the approximately $75,000 in equipment needed as part of a digital upgrade and train staff how to operate it.
The building also needs about $25,000 in electrical upgrades. Adding in another $22,000 in renovation costs would bring the project's total to around $150,000 if the grant isn't landed.
Depending on how one reads that, they're looking for $75k-$150k from Save America's Cinemas; which is a considerable sum even on the low end of that range.
$75k seems high for a single-screen operation, based on the discussions on Film-Tech, so hopefully that's just the list price being quoted. One would hope that, being an official sponsor and all, Christie would be extending some decent pricing as part of the deal.
Assuming the $75k to be real, if Save America's Cinemas is looking to raise $1M, they're only going to be able to help just over a dozen single-screen theaters. With potentially hundreds of such theaters that could use this type of assistance, that seems to be a drop in the proverbial bucket.
The best idea I've seen yet for a small theater to raise money by donations has been to use a site like Kickstarter. If I understand their terms correctly, if the theater doesn't make its stated goal, none of the donors have to pay what they pledged. At least that way, people aren't donating anonymously into a jar, where the money is gone no matter what happens.
After I wrote my first post here, I felt that I might have come across too harsh, but upon further reflection, I don't really think that's the case.
There was a valid point about the fact that sports teams do milk off the public every time they want a new stadium/arena, and I don't agree with that either. The arguments include that the local businesses make money from the events that are held, and the nebulous "status as a major league city" is important. I would imagine that movie theaters can stimulate the economy of the areas around them, especially in an area that is already depressed economically or in other ways.
The fact remains, though, that a theater that cannot sustain itself enough to have been able to save up for a cost that has been known for many years is probably not going to be able to sustain itself even after a capital investment has been made to buy equipment that does not materially improve the viability of the theater as a sustainable business. The same number of people will be coming to the theater after the digital cinema equipment is installed as before, so the core problem remains. A one-time cash investment so that the theater can continue to show movies because film isn't available any longer is not going to change that in a substantial way.
The only viable choice I can see in such situations is what theaters like the Centre Cinema in Rugby, ND did, and that is for its operation to be taken over by the community and run as a community service.
Does anyone know of a situation where a for-profit business has been in this situation, asked for a bail-out and someone has come through to make the one-time capital purchase, and then the theater actually stayed open? I would be interested in examining such a scenario, but I've not heard of one so far.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 01-07-2013 07:57 PM
$75k probably includes more than just the projector--likely a new sound system and/or structural and electrical improvements to the building.
As for baseball parks (and convention centers)--the argument is that these facilities create jobs and bring in money that gets spent on restaurants, hotels, parking, etc. that would not otherwise come to the city, and that the taxes derived from all of this outweigh the "investment" made in the park. This is an argument that has not really been proven (if anything, the data suggest that it could be disproven), and I personally don't think that tax dollars should be invested in baseball parks any more than they should be invested in stocks or bonds or anything other than projects that directly benefit taxpayers. If we are going to use tax dollars to subsidize baseball parks, then we might as well use them to subsidize factories, too, although that will never happen.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Ronda Fitzsimmons
Film Handler
Posts: 75
From: Pottstown, PA, USA
Registered: Sep 2002
|
posted 01-10-2013 01:36 AM
We've applied to Save America's Cinemas as well. Any possible help is appreciated. When we asked for letters of support from our customers, we had more than 700 in less than a day.
I thought I'd address some of the less informed comments from the original topic.
As independent second-run theatres, we've known digital is coming, and we've been saving for it. It came faster than anticipated, using red readers as a likely guide. And it's been, until fairly recently, so far out of reach financially that it didn't matter much. The new lower cost all-in-ones are the only possible option for us. Even then, we've had to really be super clear to the sales companies that we mean truly bare-bones. We've chosen Christie Solaria Ones, as the NEC's, although a tiny bit less expensive, are about half the lumens, which will matter if/when we can afford to add 3D.
We aren't eligible for VPF support. We've tried. The only company that was able to give us anything, offered such a small percentage of the required total, it would have put us out of business anyway. Perhaps you aren't aware that not everyone is eligible, nor are all offers the same. I can assure you if we had been able to get our systems paid for in full, by the film companies, we would have taken the deal. If we had been able to get even a quarter of our systems paid for, we would have seriously tried to make it work.
Best price I have right now on a bare-bones DCI-compliant system (including required 5.1 digital ready sound, install, wiring, UPS, Managed Switch, shipping, sales tax, and a few other things I've probably left out) is about $35,000 per screen. To accept the minimal VPF we would have qualified for, we were required to spend a minimum of twice that per screen. The VPF offered was a tiny fraction of the increase in cost. Our monthly payments would have been three times as much as they will be now. Assuming we can get financing, of course, as small businesses aren't on the top of lenders lists, no matter what you read. NOC was an additional requirement, if I'm remembering correctly.
I've raised almost half the amount we need to convert, through saving profits, selling my personal home, and putting out a collection jar. We only started accepting donations when a few of our customers asked us to, not because we expected them to pay for our equipment, other than through the normal cost of business. Digital will improve our presentation, and we are excited about that. The print quality of product available to second-runs right now is abysmal, when we can get prints at all. Going digital won't save us money, as it will most multiplexes, since it's really hard to cut payroll on one person. When we have two or more on, they are needed to serve customers and clean theatres. The two minutes or so threading and starting a show required by our 35mm systems won't mean less staff.
I'll be mighty interested to see how the first runs handle replacing the current systems when the VPF deals run out. Or perhaps it's not an issue since they can just cut payroll and jobs to make up the difference. In 5 - 8 years these new systems that are supposed to last 15 years (Really? Does anyone actually believe that?!?) will be toast along with VPF payments. Pretty easy to talk about how indy owners are stupid or poor planners when the film companies have your back, and basically have told everyone else - to bad, so sad.
DCI is unnecessary. We'd be able to make the conversion to digital - just as we have in our pre-show - for a small fraction of the price. Then we could also afford to upgrade as new and better technology comes out. There are existing commercially available and cheap protections already in place, and the minor difference between Blu-Ray and 2K isn't noticeable by the majority of our patrons on the 25' and smaller screens we run. I'd really love to see some cost/value considerations in the DCI specs for smaller screens, second-run, b and c run houses, etc.
I take my business seriously, and I've lost plenty of sleep working out the numbers for staying viable under the new requirements. We'll make it, thanks to foresight, willingness to sacrifice, and with help from a great staff, loyal customers, and groups like Save America's Cinemas. It makes good sense to wait until the last possible moment, as that means longer to save, less to pay for financing, and lower cost equipment that will last a little bit longer before it all has to be replaced again. Not in 25 years, but in less than 10. It would be super sweet if all the film companies provided a clearer "end" date, so we could know how long exactly we can put off the conversion.
In my little business alone, there's 27 jobs on the line, and hundreds of thousands of customers we serve a year, many of whom can't afford first run prices. RedBox truly is their only alternative.
I deeply appreciate both the financial assistance Save America's Cinemas is attempting to offer, and perhaps more importantly the public awareness of the thousands of businesses and tens of thousands of jobs this change will affect, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of folks who may no longer be able to be a part of the movie-going public when their local small town or low price theater goes dark.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Jim Cassedy
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1661
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Dec 2006
|
posted 01-10-2013 01:32 PM
quote: Dennis Benjamin
More than likely, these theatres would need:
1) Digital Projector
2) Digital Cinema Server/Player
3) A New Sound System
You're proably correct if the the theater is fairly "new"
But I'm familiar with at least two older movie houses in my area
which had very bad booth ventilation that was "OK" for the old
35mm stuff, but that needed to install air condioning systems to
accommodate the new digtalcrap.
The cost of running new power, plumbing and putting in the AC
equipment & ducting ran up appx an additional $20k in expenses
per booth.
Plus, it cost another $9k (per AC unit) to install the
extra heavy earthquake bracing required by CA building codes
when mounting the air-conditioning units on the roof.
I too would like to know "where the money goes" if some of
these theaters fail in a few months, whick undoubtedly some
will. Most people don't understand that "non profit" is only
a tax status. The theater still has to make enough money]
to pay salaries, electric & water bills, inspection & licensing
fees, yada yada....
If a theater's financial condition is such that they have to
beg for money from the public, spending hundereds of thousands
of dollars isn't going to improve their balance sheets.
As much as it pains me to say it, many of them would be better
off closing their doors now & becoming a Walgreens or a
parking lot.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic