Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: RealD glasses minumum purchase

This is topic RealD glasses minumum purchase 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=002323

Posted by David Stone (Member # 4846) on 02-19-2010, 11:24 PM:

Hi everyone,

Do you have minimum order quantities for purchasing RealD glasses.

Our local RealD agent in Australia recently sent me notification that 45 boxes or 13500 pairs of glasses is the minimum quantity I can purchase.

Cheers,

David Stone.

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 02-20-2010, 12:10 AM:

They make you buy your glasses?

Posted by David Stone (Member # 4846) on 02-20-2010, 12:17 AM:

Hi,

Yes they do, withtax about $1AUD each. so that is a about $13500 spend they want.

Cheers,

David

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-20-2010, 12:30 AM:

Go see 3D movies at competing theaters. Keep the glasses for your theater and hand them out to customers.

Do this 13,500 times.

Posted by David Stone (Member # 4846) on 02-20-2010, 12:43 AM:

Thanks for the tip, maybe I will take a trip to the US of A and hang around the theater lobbies with empty garbage bags,

Cheers,

David

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-20-2010, 01:50 AM:

Just dress in all green and tell exiting customers that you are the Real-D recycling man.

Posted by Thomas Pitt (Member # 4322) on 02-20-2010, 02:07 AM:

Speaking of Real-D recycling, theaters in this country have had 'recycle bins' for used glasses for a while now. I always assumed the glasses were sent away so the plastic could be melted down and reformed into brand new 3D glasses, but apparently that's not the case.

For the last 3D movie I saw (Battle for Terra), I was given a 'used' pair of Real D glasses. The lenses were scratched up - not quite enough to spoil the movie, but enough to cause noticeable diffraction effects when looking at the lights. It's probably from bumping against 100 other pairs of glasses in the bin.

I also saw the ticket collection employee cleaning pairs of Real D glasses while waiting for people to come up with tickets.

Posted by Phil Blake (Member # 2012) on 02-20-2010, 05:47 AM:

well I am buying real d glasses in lots of about 6 cartons at a time with not problems.

I send money they send glasses and they are very quick with dispatch as well.

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 02-20-2010, 12:40 PM:

Thomas the Real D glasses are sent back. You probably went somewhere that has had phenomenal demand due to Avatar and didn't get a big enough order of new glasses in so they've had to recycle on-site. I imagine the only places that had to play that crappy Terra film were the ones with multiple 3D installations and they'll have been hit hardest by Avatar.

Posted by Manny Montes (Member # 5639) on 02-20-2010, 05:49 PM:

quote: Thomas Pitt
I also saw the ticket collection employee cleaning pairs of Real D glasses while waiting for people to come up with tickets.

I don't know why, but that just irks me, since they aren't made to be cleaned I wonder if the employees were cleaning/sanitizing correctly.

As said above, theaters DO actually mail them out, I believe that we got $10 for every box we sent back as well (it was a promotion when the program first started)

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 02-20-2010, 06:22 PM:

We haven't got to the situation yet and probably wont but given the choice of re-using glasses or not showing a film in 3D I would take the former as it would benefit the customer most.

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 02-21-2010, 12:13 AM:

And what do you think that RealD does with the glasses collected/recycled/sent back?

quote:
The most common 3-D glasses are made by a company called Real-D. They collect used glasses in containers outside each theater, and when those containers are full, they’re sent to a recycling center in Los Angeles, which cleans and sanitizes more than 700,000 glasses per day! Then the glasses are checked for defects, repackaged, and sent back to theaters.

Needless to say, PLENTY of reports of people opening their RealD sealed packages to find scratched glasses.

RealD has said themselves that they have already sold over 100 million pair of glasses. At $.65 cents each ... you do the math.

If they recycle, they probably can get the cost down from around $.20 cents it costs them to make to $.10.

I don't know if you are forced by RealD's agreement to supply glasses per-ticket purchased from them, etc. But if not, my suggestion, is to sell the glasses as a SEPARATE item from the ticket for, say $1 (not shared with the distributor, this is a separate sale from the ticket), and if a customer brings his own pair, then he saves $1. Or talk to Master Image, who makes compatible glasses, explain to them you are using RealD and how much they can get you glasses for.

That's real recycling, cost control, etc. Plus extra profit for the theater: every time a 3D glassses is sold, around $.40 cents is made in profits. Sell them at the consession stand as well as in the box office, btw, in case someone wants to replace a pair mid-show, etc.

Posted by Sam Cat (Member # 3532) on 02-21-2010, 04:16 AM:

Hi David

I buy them direct from China straight and fly them into Brisbane. We buy around 50,000-200,000 at a time. It works out cheaper to buy them direct.

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 02-21-2010, 01:19 PM:

Julio one of the major exhibitors has done just what you suggest in the UK. It suits their business though as they sell an annual pass, yet still have to add the 3D surchage to those customers each time. By selling glasses individually it reduces their costs and those of the customer.

Posted by Matt Fields (Member # 3211) on 02-21-2010, 04:48 PM:

The Master License Agreements (in the US at least), state that the distributor gets a percentage of anything required for admission.

The studios would argue that the glasses are part of the admission price and that they are entitled to their percentage.

Fox sued a dinner theatre for requiring a food minimum, saying that they were entitled to a percentage of the food if it was required for admission.

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 02-21-2010, 06:21 PM:

They can argue all they want. The customer is NOT forced to buy the glasses. They can bring their own. They can buy them off ebay for all we care. They are NOT forced to buy popcorn either.

Sure if they don't bring glasses and they don't buy a pair anywhere they are going to see a blurry picture, but they can opt to go to 2D show.

The glasses are NOT part of the ticket. If you REQUIRE the customer to make a purchase, such as a food minimun or something to get in, then yes.

But you don't.

You are happy to let the customer come in w/o buying glasses, just the ticket (with a 3D surcharged applied, but with glasses not included).

It's a waste to be selling millions and millions of glasses over and over to the same people when they can just bring their own and buy whichever model/price they can find around.

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 02-22-2010, 12:17 PM:

They do argue - and they win. Every theatre pays film rental on the glasses rental, 3D upcharge, or whatever they call it. Every theatre (or at least the major chains) fought with the studios on this issue - and lost. It's settled and doesn't look to change anytime soon. Maybe it's different in Spain, but that's how it's going to stay here.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-22-2010, 12:21 PM:

quote: Matt Fields
Fox sued a dinner theatre for requiring a food minimum, saying that they were entitled to a percentage of the food if it was required for admission.

Do you know which theater? What was their food minimum? Did they actually require a food minimum, or was that minimum amount of food included in the ticket price?

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 02-22-2010, 12:32 PM:

So Fox are now into making food? [Confused]

I never knew that poor old Rupert was so hard up for cash.

Bloody hell, what next?....a percentage on concession revenue? [fu]

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 02-22-2010, 04:21 PM:

quote: Chad Souder
They do argue - and they win. Every theatre pays film rental on the glasses rental, 3D upcharge, or whatever they call it. Every theatre (or at least the major chains) fought with the studios on this issue - and lost. It's settled and doesn't look to change anytime soon. Maybe it's different in Spain, but that's how it's going to stay here.

Don't get me wrong. This is DIFFERENT from the 3D surcharge. You DO charge a 3D surcharge included in the ticket price and split it with the distributor.

You just give the customer the OPTION to bring his own pair of glasses or SELL them a new pair, if they so WISH at free will. If they don't want it, they can still purchase the ticket just fine, with its 3D surcharge intact, but you warn them they'll be better off buying the 2D version, as it'll be less blurry [Wink]

I don't know elsewhere, but there is no way studios will win anything remotely like that in Spain.

Customers are NOT required to buy food or buy graduated glasses or buy hats or buy binoculars to watch a film. If they want to, all those items are available for sale at the lobby, ebay or elsewhere. The studios just provides the film.

A different thing would be if they were forced to buy the items. Then I agree with the studios. But they are not. You can argue that without 3D glasses they can't (really) enjoy the film, as it looks blurry without them. The same as people who need graduated glasses or hearing aids. But the consumer doesn't have to buy a different pair of glasses everytime. That, I'm sure, any judge will agree with.

They buy the glasses once, and then go enjoy all the 3D movies they want.

I doubt the studios will make a lot of fuzz about the (forced) sale of glasses as there is no money in it for them. The glasses have a fixed cost and the money goes neither to the distributor nor to the theater, but to the glasses reseller/manufacturer. Selling them separate doesn't significantly affect the distributor, while it allows the theater to make a small extra profit from a SALES act. Last I checked, when you sold something, you were allowed by the law to make a profit from the act of the sale to cover the cost of the merchandise, the cost of labor, the taxes and enjoy anything left over from the transaction.

You don't buy the glasses nor the popcorn from the distributor, nor have you any reason to split any profits from its SALE to them.

What MAY be illegal and you may get sued about, is a customer complaining he already has a pair of 3D glasses that he purchased on ebay (or elsewhere, there are "designer" 3D glasses available) and you are forcing him to pay for another (inferior) pair every single time he goes to your theater to watch a film that he can watch just fine because he already has a pair glasses.

Posted by Matt Fields (Member # 3211) on 02-24-2010, 05:27 PM:

Sorry Brad for the slow response...I didn't check this thread again. The theatre in question was an account of my booker, who relayed the story to me. I think the theatre was in the Chicago area, but that could be wrong.

The theatre was having a problem with people coming in and not buying anything, even a drink. Well they want to sell burgers and what not so they placed the minimum order on there to discourage those people from coming. When Fox found out they threatened a lawsuit and eventually the minimum was dropped. My previous post was poorly worded, I don't know for sure if it went all the way to court or not, but they were at least strong armed into dropping the minimum.

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 02-24-2010, 07:47 PM:

Could a dinner theatre avoid the problem by putting the ticket prices up and providing 'free' basic food items e.g soft drinks and small bites e.g. olives? You'd have to pay a cut to the distributor but it might offset the losses they make from people not buying food. The customers who buy food anyway wouldn't be inconvenienced as that part of their meal was now included. Some of our cinemas have a similar set-up in their VIP areas, your ticket gets you access to free unlimited drinks/popcorn/nachos from the stand.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-24-2010, 10:37 PM:

quote:
You just give the customer the OPTION to bring his own pair of glasses or SELL them a new pair, if they so WISH at free will. If they don't want it, they can still purchase the ticket just fine, with its 3D surcharge intact,

Julio, you ARE forced to "buy" the glasses, but you're not forced to TAKE the glasses. The surcharge is the price for the 3-D upgrade, which includes the glasses.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 02-25-2010, 01:24 AM:

There are cinemas here in Australia who do exactly as Julio suggests.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-25-2010, 01:48 AM:

quote: Caleb Johnstone-Cowan
Could a dinner theatre avoid the problem by putting the ticket prices up and providing 'free' basic food items e.g soft drinks and small bites e.g. olives? You'd have to pay a cut to the distributor but it might offset the losses they make from people not buying food.

Smarter idea, imo, is to lower the ticket price to a point where the people in your area are likely to go ahead and purchase food anyway, then negotiate with the studio for possibly increasing their percentage of the box office pull. And since you make a way better profit margin on the food than the tickets, you end up winning in the end.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-25-2010, 11:02 AM:

"Negotiate with the studio!" That's a good one. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 02-25-2010, 12:04 PM:

Ok so the more likely thing is that the studio will say "You're going to increase the percentage you give to us since you want a cheaper ticket price." But again, since the goal in the scenario is to increase purchases of your food, that is perfectly acceptable in my scenario.

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 02-25-2010, 08:22 PM:

I see what you mean, but I'm not convinced low ticket prices impact positively on food spend or hit rates. In my experience customers who have got a cheap deal on a ticket are likely to not pay the prices cinemas charge for food because (depending on your opinion) they're either tight or sensible. It depends on your local market though I guess.

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 02-25-2010, 08:38 PM:

I have noticed that most people who present free passes organised by the distributor do not purchase anything from the kiosk.
Some distributors issue free passes for every release but they are only redeemed at very popular films.