This is topic Regal swallows up UA and Edwards? WTF? in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=000434
Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 01-30-2002, 04:53 PM:
Lead story this morning in The Hollywood Reporter online edition:"In a move that may return some leverage to the long-beleagured exhibition industry, Anschutz Corp. will consolidate its three theater
chains, Regal Cinemas, United Artists Theatre Circuit and Edwards Theatres, into one entity -- with Mike Campbell, CEO of Regal Cinemas,
crowned as CEO of the combined theater operations. Anschutz Corp. has named United Artists CEO Kurt Hall to helm a second company to manage new initiatives, according to Campbell and Hall. Campbell will run the exhibition company -- to be made up of the 20% of the U.S. theater screens acquired in the past 18 months by Denver billionaire Philip Anschutz -- from Regal's Knoxville, Tenn., headquarters. Hall's company, yet to be named, will focus on the company's advertising, digital strategy and satellite network operations from UA's Denver headquarters. Regal chief operating officer Greg Dunn will continue in that role in the combined theater exhibition company. Industry sources say Anschutz Corp. looked to Regal, which emerged from bankruptcy Tuesday, to manage the combined theater operations because of the company's experience integrating companies."
Let me get this straight.
Mike Campbell -- a career Regal man who saw Regal bloat to something the size of Enron -- as CEO of the combined Regal/UA/Edwards?
Kurt Hall -- who saved a sinking ship at UA and helped nurse it back to health -- in charge of a subsidiary?
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 01-30-2002, 05:27 PM:
James Edwards Sr., whom I assume would be deceased by now, is probably spinning in his grave. 
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 01-30-2002, 05:45 PM:
Dave
Yes he has passed away.
But with this he is spinning in his grave.
I worked Atlantic Palace 10, Alhambra Place 5, Temple City 4 and
a 10 plex near Magic Mountain.
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 01-30-2002, 06:19 PM:
What's the problem with this?------------------
This one time, at Projection Camp, I stuck a xenon bulb....
Posted by Keith Peticolas (Member # 971) on 01-30-2002, 06:33 PM:
I wonder if Regal will install that specific smell that all their theaters up here in AK. have. Every one of them smells like mildew and death. I love Regal. We make a ton of money everytime we open the same show. The audience knows that they suck.
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 01-30-2002, 07:09 PM:
Ken asked "What's the problem with this?"Well, probably nothing. It just mirrors current business trends in general where smaller companies can't survive without merging with or being acquired by larger companies. Market reality.
My comment about Edwards is prompted only because I had the opportunity to meet Mr. Edwards, and I saw his regional chain grow from 1 theater (the 1-screen Edwards Cinema in Costa Mesa) into the dominant player in the area south of Los Angeles. Edwards saw that Orange County was going to experience phenomenol growth and staked his theater fortune on servicing that market. Mr. Edwards had ties to the movie business and he also appreciated showmanship. Right up until I left CA in 1990, their new construction always had waterfall curtains, and they stubbornly resisted "slide shows" which everyone else was doing by that time. Most of these neighborhood multiplexes had 1 screen equipped for 35/70mm. But they got carried away with building neighborhood theaters on every corner. Looking at their online theater directory, it looks like half their locations have been closed, even ones that weren't all that old.
Just being sentimental I guess. 
------------------
- dave
Avoid the meadow...
Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 01-30-2002, 08:13 PM:
What's wrong with this?First, Regal could not manage their 4,000 screen circuit profitably. So let's increase it by 50% and give operations to the same guy?
Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 01-30-2002, 09:31 PM:
It's my understaning that they will continue to operate under three different names. At least they'll save a ton of $ on not having to change stationary and signage.But...what about locations that are within several miles of one another??? Does it really make sense to compete against yourself? Or am I missing something? 
Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 01-30-2002, 10:35 PM:
In some areas they will be the ONLY game in town as they will then own EVERY theater. Can you say monopoly?
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 01-30-2002, 10:42 PM:
In some areas Regal already is the only game in town, like Ft. Myers-Bonita Springs-Naples.
Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 01-30-2002, 11:02 PM:
Do you think the Feds are going to get involved (a la the Loews/Sony/Cineplex merger in NY & Chicago)?
Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 01-30-2002, 11:26 PM:
You can't say technically that it is a monopoly because as long as you have Video stores and cable companies in the same area offering the same entertainment, (movies), nothing can be done. Someone tried to claim that in our area years ago when loews was the only chain here and theat is what they were told. Does anyone outh there remember premier cinemas another campbell chain. Need I say more for those who do remember them.
Posted by Scott D. Neff (Member # 185) on 01-31-2002, 02:43 AM:
I think it might be a little unfair to say that Campbell will screw up the new integrated company... the portion of the article said that he'll be in charge of only SOME of the theatres -- it makes it seem as though all the GOOD theatres will be concentrated on and considered an Anshutz Theatre... the rest will remain Regally screwed.Besides -- he may have screwed up Regal -- but was it really the way Regal operated its theatres? or was it more their aggresive aquisition philosophy?
Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 01-31-2002, 09:26 AM:
Mike Campbell----the blind lead the blind (again!).
Posted by Jeff Leyland (Member # 1092) on 01-31-2002, 12:55 PM:
On a national scale, I do not see many areas where they could be considered monopolistic. Each chain dominates in different markets. Sure there will be some markets where they already compete, but not enough. I believe many of Regal's problems stemmed from a very poor real estate department that literally put them everywhere.
But there would not be a 'Regal Sucks' website if they were taking care of their customers.
Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 01-31-2002, 02:05 PM:
And I would still be employed at Regal if they cared about having a quality operation!
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 01-31-2002, 08:45 PM:
Why does everyone hate Regal? What do you have against Campell? What is this "Regal Sucks" website you speak of?------------------
This one time, at Projection Camp, I stuck a xenon bulb....
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 01-31-2002, 11:05 PM:
Ken, go to http://www.google.com When you get to the home page, type in Regal Cinemas and hit " Google Search", not the "I Feel Lucky" button
You will find it on the third hit.
Posted by Christopher Duvall (Member # 284) on 02-01-2002, 04:26 AM:
I have seen this site as well. Most of the complaints are from dumb teenagers that were booted out of R-rated movies or complaints about prices being too high which is true for all theatres. Now some complaints are legit and there is some concern, but what I have read, most things there are, again, from dumb teens not getting their way and disgruntled employees. I think Regal was singled out because it is the largest chain. It seems everybody always hates the top dog. The same can be said about other large companies...McDonalds, Microsoft, WalMart, etc. That's my 2cents
Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 02-01-2002, 01:46 PM:
Yes, I've seen that website, it really doesn't have much credibility since there's little or no comments about actual presentation. For a better example of a "This Company Sucks" website, check out www.bestbuysux.org
Posted by Jeff Leyland (Member # 1092) on 02-01-2002, 02:29 PM:
I have never really had any bad experiences at Regal. Only a few disappointments, mostly at older locations purchased from other companies. But I think that like all big companies, there are bad areas, with poor management that give the whole company a bad name.
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 02-01-2002, 03:02 PM:
Hi, ChristopherAcually, I have to defend the some of the teenagers. They are smarter than most people give them credit for. True, some of the teenagers are very crude in their language, but there are adults that are just as bad as they are.
As far as the comments on Regal Cinemas Sucks page, I would support about 50 to 60% of the negative comments. I have seen them in action here on the West Coast.
I have seen the West Coast District Manager rip kids apart so bad that the kids were left in tears. I have seen this same manager try to smooth talk and "butter up" two other kids and promise them a wonderful career. Those promises were disgarded as lies. They didn't fall for it at all.
The two kids I am in reference to - well, one is making $55,000 a year with an Aerospace company, and the other is an electrician working for the US Government facility. His wages are more than mine.
When the district manager says something to the effect, "I demand you guys make me look good", what the hell kind of management style is that?
Sorry, Chris....you just pushed a button that set me off. I could go on and on, but I have to keep the blood pressure down.
Let me say one thing....Maybe the front office is not in tune as to what the hell is going on out here. Management better take a look at itself. It takes only one rottin' apple to spoil the bushel. I was under the impression the District Manager of this area is known within the Regal Circles as the "Hatchet Man."
Regal has no idea of their equipment inventory. They waste perfectly good equipment. When they bought us, in came the District Manager with his hatchet, severence packages (which amounted to a free ticket for life and a tub of raunchy popcorn), over 1,000 dollars worth of floor buffing equipment for a theater had no floors to buff (unless they want to buff the lobby carpet), and all his WD-40 I promptly tossed in the dumpster, not to mention their stupid roller coaster ride teasers, and other crap they wanted run on the screens.
People tell me that theater is now a dump, rude employees, filthy auditoriums to the point where they actually stink. Many friends of mine that live in that town say they don't patronize that theater anymore.
Doesn't it seem odd that most of the worst complaints are coming from the West Coast?
Posted by Josh Kirkhart (Member # 1046) on 02-01-2002, 04:21 PM:
We just changed policy trailers to coke and its still the same 'rollercoaster' with coke cups printed in. Are these generic made for us by tes or what? Horrible print job on the scope trailers, they have thick lines between frames so that when projected you have to be perfect or else it falls off the screen.
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 02-01-2002, 11:24 PM:
It doesn't take much to add Coke graphics in place of the Pepsi graphics. This is the exact same policy as it was before we had the Pepsi Girl, except older candies were removed, new ones put in their place, and the graphics brightened up. Not too hard to do with computers.As far as the complaints coming from the West coast....I supposed it's possible to have bad management in one particular area, giving the company a bad name in that area. That sucks. Sorry to hear about all of your troubles.
------------------
This one time, at Projection Camp, I stuck a xenon bulb....
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 02-01-2002, 11:41 PM:
I read the first couple of comments on the site. The webmaster and the author of the first comment are complete asses. Perhaps they do have a few legitimate complaints. But most of what they said is 
. Yeah, Regal is really owned by Pepsi. OK there buddy. 
I'm not even going to waste my time sending this person an email just so she can make fun of me with her friends. Like I said, what an ass.
Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 02-02-2002, 01:55 AM:
I talked to (name removed) today, and according to him, here is the deal with the Edwards side of the coin. Edwards will keep its name - at least for the time being. Coke will be replaced with Pepsi, as soon as the coke contract is up. All the corperate stuff will be handled by Anchuntz Entertainment in Knoxville, TN (Regal's current office). Edwards Policy trailers are in the works (very un-edwards). I believe that the current Edwards offices will be transfered over in May. I hope they dont make me wear one of those gawdawfull red vests all the Regal employes wear. Blech...
(modified 4-19-02 by Mike Olpin)
Posted by Christopher Duvall (Member # 284) on 02-02-2002, 06:18 AM:
The vests are gone...
Posted by Christopher Duvall (Member # 284) on 02-02-2002, 06:44 AM:
Hey Paul,Sounds like you have received the end of the stick at one time. Due to some restrictions with media, I cannot say much about Regal, but I will defend myself and the others I have worked with. The DM's, GM's, techs and others in the areas I have worked with all care about presentation, the employees and customers. I have heard horror stories about how screwed up things happen, but the same can be said about other chains as well. I know, I worked for AMC at one time. I agree that there is a good portion of truth that can be found on that web-site about some of the locations under the Regal umbrella. I have seen it first hand sometimes. It is a shame that there are managers and employees that do just enough to get by and say to hell with the staff and customers. However, I know there many Regal people that do care and want to their best to entertain people and do the best that they can. Some of them are here on this site now either posting and interacting with others, such as myself, or just lurking trying to learn as much as they can to better themselves. One of our higher-ups actually told us about this site and what Brad is trying to here. I can go on and on about this but I will stop. I just want to go on the record by saying that I will always try to the best I can to run the cleanest, well maintained, happily staffed operation with the best presentation that I can offer with what is given to me. I am very passionate about running my location and I will be happy doing it until the day I die, even if that means I never get advanced and just stay the captain of the ship. I know I am not just the only one that feels like that either. Those other individuals would not be here on this web-site...
OK rant off...sorry.
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 02-02-2002, 10:09 AM:
A-frickin-men! It's unfortunate that one location is giving the company a bad name, but Chris is absolutely right. I know there are GM's and DM's out there who care about presentation, customer service, and operation.Unfortunately, some of the older locations that have been acquired are pretty crapy. That doesn't mean that the company suck, as some on the Regal Sucks site would claim.
Posted by Jeff Leyland (Member # 1092) on 02-02-2002, 01:11 PM:
Mike,Edwards will switch to Pepsi? I figured the whole reason for Regal switching to Coke was so that Anschutz and Co. would have all three chains using the same supplies.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-02-2002, 02:08 PM:
Ken, I couldn't agree more with Christopher. In EVERY chain you will have some managers and/or staff that just doesn't give a flip about anything except for that paycheck and it will reflect poorly. Unfortunately, the solution isn't for the chains to "crack down", because that will only turn their employees further against the company. Getting a staff that cares is the best way to run a theater. Matthew Mallow just started a new thread today for this very reason...he doesn't want to have a crappy staff.There will always be "bad" Regals and there will always be "good" Regals, just like UA, AMC, Loews, etc, etc, etc.
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 02-02-2002, 02:18 PM:
Quote: "Edwards will switch to Pepsi? I figured the whole reason for Regal switching to Coke was so that Anschutz and Co. would have all three chains using the same supplies."My sediments (? ) exactly.
------------------
This one time, at Projection Camp, I stuck a xenon bulb....
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-02-2002, 02:25 PM:
If UA switches to Pepsi that will really suck! It amazes me the people who think Coke and Pepsi is basically the same thing. Pepsi is a highly sweetened version of Coke (and a bad knockoff at that). Sure kids think it's great, but kids like anything that is extra sweet. I wait for the day I actually see a "Pepsi challenge" in person. I am going to take that test and get a big 'ol gulp of Pepsi so I can spit it into the guy's face like they do in those Orlando Jones commercials when the people drink dishwater.
Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 02-02-2002, 03:08 PM:
(name removed) knows a guy at pepsi, who told him about the switch.(modified 4-19-02 by Mike Olpin)
Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 02-03-2002, 12:53 AM:
I talked with him agian this evening. He was told today that we are going to stay Coke afterall.I sure wish coke would make a good Mountain Dew knockoff ;-)
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 02-03-2002, 03:33 PM:
You have Surge and Mellow Yellow. Neither of them tastes exactly like MD, but MY is pretty close. My theater now has Mellow Yellow. I can recognize the differences between Dew and Mellow Yellow, but I don't really have a preference.------------------
This one time, at Projection Camp, I stuck a xenon bulb....
Posted by Christopher Duvall (Member # 284) on 02-04-2002, 04:49 AM:
Before the Coke switch, I would get Mt. Dew with a hint of Hawaiian Punch. Can't "Dew" that anymore. But hey, I got Cherry Coke now...
Posted by Jeff Leyland (Member # 1092) on 02-04-2002, 07:40 PM:
Just curious, now that Regal has switched to Coke, what flavors are they carrying?
Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 02-17-2002, 11:04 AM:
OK, everyone. I happen to be friends with the Campbell family. Here's how it works: Business-wise Mike Campbell does a great job. He is the best candidate for the position. Anyone ever think about the other senior vice presidents on Regal's staff that could have made mistakes to cause the company to go into bankruptcy. I worked for Regal for five years, one year in their corporate office. I know how it is at their theatres. I personally do not attend Regal theatres to see movies. They run cookie-cutter operations and it is all about the almighty dollar for them. The customers and the employees of Regal Cinemas are not happy people. However, in our capitalist society their formula works. The bankruptcy was what was convienant to do business - it was needed to come into the Anschutz Kingdom. It is the billionaire Philip Anschutz that I am worried about........
Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 02-17-2002, 11:50 AM:
So what you're saying is that he is not responsible for the actions of the people he is paid to supervise? If that's the case, I'll never hire him.I am responsible for the operation of my department. If one of my guys screws up, I answer for it. The General Manager answers for my actions as well as all of the other departments. The VP of Operations answers for how the GMs run their theaters.
One of two things happened here: Mr. Campbell wasn't involved enough in the strategic planning of the company; or Mr. Campbell didn't know enough about strategic planning for a company.
No offense to Mr. Campbell ... I'm sure he's a great guy. But I know a lot of great guys that are getting by on dumb luck ... for now.
Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 02-17-2002, 05:12 PM:
Hey,I have managed my own theatres myself and I know that the guy at the top is the one responsible. I am in no way agreeing with the situation - I was trying to play devil's advocate. I worked for that company for five years and I was treated like crap. I now work for a theatre chain that actually pays well and treats employees like human beings. It is nice to finally 'arrive' in this business. Regal Cinemas, in an investor's eyes, was a successful experiment. Trust me, there are plenty of millionaires that made their money off of Regal and got out while they were on top.
Posted by Andrew Walls (Member # 179) on 03-24-2002, 09:56 PM:
For those interested in the Regal/UA/Edwards Merger, there is a new list of Corporate people available at www.regalcinemas.com
Posted by Josh Kirkhart (Member # 1046) on 03-26-2002, 12:31 PM:
There is a lot of repositioning of people going on right now at regal and edwards. In the next few weeks most edwards locations will see corporate coming in starting the training on new systems and the differences in managing styles and rules. Guys(girls)in the booth better be on thier toes because they are switching around regional booth techs and looking at new people to pick up the torch. It looks like the time to either stand up and let everyone know what you think needs to be done, without raising too much fuss of'course. Good luck to everyone and post on any important things you think you can without sticking out your neck to far.
The changes going on here are minor, but look to be good for austin theatres, A new reg. tech for freshness and new ideas, and a couple very knowlegable guys, one from edwards and one from ua. All together I'm confident that this shake-up will produce some good results.
Posted by Tristan Lane (Member # 1169) on 03-26-2002, 07:56 PM:
It is very exciting indeed. 
I can say that they are working hard to improve the quality of theaters.
Posted by Scott Madsen (Member # 167) on 04-01-2002, 05:36 PM:
In regards to comments earlier wondering about Campbell and Hall's new duties: According to their stock offering, it appears to be a joint CEO thing, with Hall getting to run the new digital thing. And the base salary's are equal.
Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 04-02-2002, 06:37 AM:
According to the Regal Website, they are Co-CEOs.
Posted by Jerry Chase (Member # 660) on 04-02-2002, 09:29 AM:
I think Rome tried something similar. It should make for entertaining fighting before one of them finds his nuts in a nutcracker.
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-02-2002, 10:11 AM:
Co-CEOs? That never works. Egos and all that. Someone will emerge as the dominant force.
Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 04-02-2002, 05:19 PM:
Brad: From what I learned at least 1 UA location in Dallas-Fort Worth will become a Regal around 5/1. Since UA is long established in DFW why is Regal so eager to change things there?I shudder to think what would happen if that happened in NYC. At least one of the failed NYC Regals is doing better as a UA.
Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 04-03-2002, 01:20 AM:
5/1? Thats actually later than a lot of other locations involved in this merger. At Edwards (location removed), Friday (4/5) is set as the official date for Regal to take control. (More on this in the topic "RIP Edwards")(modified 4-19-02 by Mike Olpin)
Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 04-03-2002, 06:50 AM:
I was under the impression that the names were going to stay the same for a while. It costs a lot of money to re-brand a theater. They would just all be headed by "Regal Entertainment Group".Besides I bet there are advantages to seperate names. For example, if a customer becomes dis-satsfied at a UA and vows never to return to any UA, maybe they will start going to Edwards or Regal. Not to mention the name recognition.
My guess is that they will stay the same for a few more months. They just will be reporting to Knoxville instead of Colorado and California.
Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 04-03-2002, 01:32 PM:
The signs outside the theatre will be the same as always, however, we will be running the regal cinemas "roller coaster" strip, and most of the stuff inside will be branded "Regal".
Posted by Jeff Akin (Member # 1198) on 04-03-2002, 08:40 PM:
Edwards will be integrated by 4/5 and UA will be integrated by 5/3.------------------
-----------
2 Time ICWF Champion
2 Time ICWF Hardcore Champion
Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 04-05-2002, 05:48 PM:
The changes have begun in earnest. Visit the Regal website and you'll see all the related logos at the top of the home page. Enter your zip code for showtimes and you'll get all the Regal Group theaters near you. I did that today and got 3 Regals plus 2 UAs for my area.Some things, though, never change: One of those Regals has gone back to four-walling a screen for Bollywood imports. As a result that Regal does not get to open Y Tu Mama Tambien on its New Jersey/national break.
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-05-2002, 06:14 PM:
Regal's newspaper ad changed here this week. It now has the "Regal Cinemas" logo at the top, and underneath in smaller type "A Regal Entertainment Group Company". The sound format legend was moved from the bottom of the ad to the top. And it looks like they are bringing back a discount weekday: "Monday Discount Shows All Day except * Films". Maybe I haven't been paying attention but I don't think they've had a discount day here for quite a long time.Looking at their re-done web page, the online comment card no long has a pull-down list of their theaters...
Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 08-18-2002, 01:55 PM:
6 1/2 months on and we're already seeing similarities between UA and Regal in the Northeast. That's based on my visits to a UA last Sunday and a Regal yesterday.The UA Cortlandt Stadium in Mohegan Lake NY has:
Regal Entertainment Group uniforms/nametags
Regal Cinemedia preshow
Regal Entertainment Group "rollercoaster" policy
Regal Entertainment Group comment card (Mike Campbell Drive)
The Regal Barn Plaza in Doylestown PA has:
Regal Cinemas uniforms/nametags
Cinema Screen Advertising preshow
Regal Cinemas "rollercoaster" policy
Regal Cinemas comment card (Commercial Park Drive)
As stated on an earlier post UA showtimes are now available through the Regal website. UA also has a pre-Regal contract with AOL MovieFone but I'm not sure if or when Regal corporate will try to get out of the MovieFone contract.
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 08-18-2002, 04:29 PM:
Some of the Regal's in my area have gotten new Regal Entertainment nametags for the managers, but the employees still wear Regal Cinemas polo shirts. These shirts are less than 6 months old, so it would seem silly to get new ones already. Does anyone know if Regal is planning on using Regal Entertainment shirts company wide eventually?
Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 08-19-2002, 07:45 AM:
I heard the Regal Cinemedia preshow is going to all the theaters.. one market at a time.
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 08-19-2002, 11:17 AM:
...kind of like The Borg swallowing one species at a time.=TMP=
Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 08-19-2002, 01:58 PM:
What aspect ratio is the Cinemedia preshow in? Are they raising the top-masking screens for it at all locations?
Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 08-19-2002, 02:41 PM:
From what I can tell, the aspect ratio is the same as TV in the auditoriums. I know that it is all driven by a server installed on every individual screen. They also put plasma screens in the lobby that run off of a server. It is all handled by Regal CineMedia in Colorado (formerly the UA office).The preshow that is shown in the theaters is a combination of MPEG videos of commercials/music videos and powerpoint style slides.
From what I have seen, the lobby show only has had the videos and commercials. (AND Trailers) They are widescreen.
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 08-20-2002, 05:11 PM:
Oh god, now we have VIDEO commercials to look forward to instead of slides!?!? I bet some good old fashioned TRAILERS would look great on those widescreen plasma lobby displays. 
What is this world coming to? Maybe I should think twice about applying to any of Regal's Borg ships. I would go nuts there.=TMP=
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 08-29-2002, 12:34 PM:
Just noticed in the paper today unter the Movie Times section that the local Regals have now added the word "stadium" to their theaters. I.E. the "Regal Waterford Lakes 20" is now "Regal Waterford Lakes Stadium 20"I could be wrong, but was this originally a UA practice? I don't recall Regal ever calling any of their theaters "stadium" even if they were, but UA's on the other hand did.
=TMP=
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 08-29-2002, 08:56 PM:
You would think that some clever marketing director would realize that the word "stadium" does not necessarily connotate anything particularly positive. It is reminiscent sports arean seating where you sat on hardwood boards. There is nothing that hints of comfort or elegance in the word stadium. Seems at least some chain would do well being the first to call it something more appealing.... "Comfort Rocker Seats with our exclusive Direct Line Viewing." Sure sounds better than stadium seating.
Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 08-29-2002, 10:56 PM:
I think most people these days, especially frequent movie goers, know that by nature, "stadium" conveys more comfort when applied to the context of a movie theater. I would choose a theater that said "stadium" in the ad vs. one that did not.------------------
This one time, at Projection Camp, I stuck a xenon bulb....
Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 08-30-2002, 12:20 AM:
Although I prefer raked floor seating, I've heard lots of people say that they prefer stadium seating. But that's only in markets where there were still some flat floors, or the memories of them. After the building boom, all that hasn't been shut in most medium markets I've seen around are only stadium multiplexes.I think it was a combination of things that caused them to prefer stadium seating: some of the flat floor theaters were older, nastier, bad spacing between seats, broken seats, etc. I think another reason a lot of people like stadium seating is also that it is more "socially isolating" - when people stand or move it's not as much in your face, & even the people who are seated near you don't seem to be so immediate. There's less of that "part of a crowd in the auditorium" feeling.
Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 08-30-2002, 12:37 AM:
Edwards always used STADIUM in the name of their stadium theatres. maybe that's a carry-over to the new chain.
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 08-31-2002, 11:57 AM:
Yah, I agree, "stadium" has come to be understood by the genral public as meaning seating were you have no obstruction in front of you....it use to be the Louge in the days of movie palaces -- and you paid a premium for sitting there. I just think that at the time they first started designing this type of theatre, someone would have come up with something better in terms of advertising punch. Again, it just shows this long-term indifference exhibition has had in hyping their own product, which, many are still shocked to hear, is NOT the picture on the screen -- THAT'S the studio's product. The exhibitor's product is the environment in which that movie is shown. You hardly ever hear a theatre bragging about its projection or sound qualty, or its presentation in general, or patron comfort or what is unique about their operation that makes them more attractive than their competitors. Especially now with mass marketing of movies, all opening everywhere at the same time, even in theatres on the same street, you would think theatre management would be fighting tooth and nail to pamper patrons and try to lure them to see a film in THERE theatre as opposed to the competition's across the street. In every other business this is a given....two bars in the same neighborhood, both doing ok business, bar #1 decides to lower prices and add dancing girls -- half the patrons from bar #2 is now in bar #1. Simple. Why can't theatre owners see this? I mean, it's not like they are not spending money on improving their plants -- some new multiplexs that have been built recently are quite comfrotable, pleasant environments. But you are not told about that in any ads or even in the theatre proper. Makes no sense.
Frank
Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 09-02-2002, 01:52 PM:
I noticed today that yet another UA theater has changed hands around my town in South Florida. Is UA (or rather UA theaters under Regal Ent.) pulling out of Florida like GCC did?We used to have:
UA Wellington Marketplace 8. (Closed 2000, reopened as an independent)
UA Riverbridge 8. (Closed, stripped, sold to BMC and reopened in 2002)
UA Promenade Plaza. (Changed hands to BMC recently.)
UA Okee Square. (Changed hands to BMC most recently.)
BMC also bought the old GCC 6 in Palm Beach Gardens a couple years ago. They're doing well despite being a few miles from a Regal 18 and a Crown 16/IMAX.
The only UA-branded theater remaining in the area is the UA Boynton Beach 9, but it looks like it's on its last legs. (they're playing stuff like Ya-Ya Sisterhood, Full Frontal, and Tadpole) No doubt Regal is trying to kill this one off because there's a Regal-branded theater literally walking distance away. It won't be missed if it does in fact close. 2:1 screens, no masking curtains, wide center aisles, and horrible (mono?) sound.
=TMP=
Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 09-02-2002, 04:22 PM:
Who is BMC?
Richard Fowler
TVP-Theatre & Video Products Inc. www.tvpmiami.com
Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 09-02-2002, 05:19 PM:
There are still plenty of UA's in Florida that do well. I doubt those are going anywhere.