MoviePass settles FTC allegations that they limited usage, exposed user data

Post by tolbish » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 6:19 PM UTC

Chris2048 wrote: post #46

tolbish wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why you are getting downvoted. When people say they support "Law and order" they are not talking about all crime—they are not referring to fraud or market manipulation for example (white collar crime). They are referring to enforcing laws on just a certain subset of society.

> They are referring to enforcing laws on just a certain subset of society. Or enforcing a certain subset of laws on all society. And it's not just the "bigbiz-friendly" reds, it's also the blues with their "lets not punish non-violent crime". The fact is laws in the US (and elsewhere) are written, but unevenly enforced, as such what remains is quibbling over priority. I want to see more punishments for white collar…

Post by listenallyall » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 6:20 PM UTC

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #83

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #24

Unpopular opinion, but MoviePass could have survived a lot longer if they had more funding. I think there could have been a real opportunity with establishing themselves the main funnel to getting consumers to physical theaters. They couldn't hold on long enough to see what could be possible with such a moat.

I think their main mistake was antagonizing the big theater chains. They should've had their hand outstretched to the chains, consistently, from the very beginning. The (probably smaller) chains that play ball and negotiate selling cheaper tickets to moviepass get rewarded with more foot traffic, the chains that don't play ball get punished in small ways. By gently and gradually steering traffic away from AMC, they w…

Post by jedberg » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 6:25 PM UTC

jlarocco wrote: post #64

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #24

Unpopular opinion, but MoviePass could have survived a lot longer if they had more funding. I think there could have been a real opportunity with establishing themselves the main funnel to getting consumers to physical theaters. They couldn't hold on long enough to see what could be possible with such a moat.

Sure, but any business can survive indefinitely if they're given unlimited funding with no expectation of returns. In your opinion, what's the point of being the main funnel to theaters if you're losing money hand over fist to do so? What was the plan for profitability? Was the goal to somehow strong arm movie theaters into discounted pricing? Why would theaters agree to that when there's no benefit for them to do so…

Post by jermaustin1 » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 6:30 PM UTC

nathancahill wrote: post #124

jermaustin1 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the bragging rights. It was already about to be delisted and I think it was sub $1/share. So I looked up how much I'd need to own to match the largest individual investor, and decided. I could have invested the paltry amount (I actually cannot remember how much, but it was I only held for a couple of days, before selling it at a ~70% loss - or vanguard liquidating when it delisted - I cannot remember now. But it…

Haha is "the office" WallSteetBets?

Post by listenallyall » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 6:35 PM UTC

jlarocco wrote: post #64

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #24

Unpopular opinion, but MoviePass could have survived a lot longer if they had more funding. I think there could have been a real opportunity with establishing themselves the main funnel to getting consumers to physical theaters. They couldn't hold on long enough to see what could be possible with such a moat.

Sure, but any business can survive indefinitely if they're given unlimited funding with no expectation of returns. In your opinion, what's the point of being the main funnel to theaters if you're losing money hand over fist to do so? What was the plan for profitability? Was the goal to somehow strong arm movie theaters into discounted pricing? Why would theaters agree to that when there's no benefit for them to do so…