Welcome to BigScreenBiz.com

I have always been a fan of adding more screens. Not forever but generally speaking if you are 1-2-3-4 screen theatre at the smaller end... you'd love to have 1-2 more screens at a minium. In my own case we added one screen to a 2 screen and more than doubled the business in one year. So... now I am looking at going from 2 to 4 screens. Have you ever seen or heard of a theatre adding screens and not having a dramatic bump? Have you ever seen someone add screens and be sorry? Have you ever added screens and seen a bump? Is it always better to add a screen or two?

It almost always works -- The biggest difference is the amount of first run product you can play .

really you guys? One person had one comment? Help me out here.

Well Mike I'm not an expert in this since I have only managed a couple of multiplexes. But I would think adding screens would give you an opportunity to be more diversified and appeal to more demographics by running different types of films at the same time. But I also think you don't need to go beyond four. Too many screens and you may end up booking junk just to have something on the screen. FWIW.

Mike, you already have more experience at adding screens than most other forum participants. It would be hard for us to tell you something new. I did twin my theater before I re-opened it, but I don't have any numbers from the days when it was a single screen. I do think a 3rd screen would have been good if I had room for it. Then I would not have been forced to go without getting a new movie on a weekend because of 2, 3, or 4 week commitments tying up my two screens. This happened a few times, and it was not good. I'm sure any twin or single that plays movies on the break will have the same problems.

The things that make a theater owner hesitate before adding screens are lack of space, lack of money for construction and equipment, and the realization that you lose total seating capacity when you divide up existing auditorium space.

As for having twinned my theater, I can say that we lost lots of seating because of the redesign. But, I don't have any regrets since it did make it possible to open more movies on the break. Without the 2nd screen, I would have been in the same tied up boat every time I got a movie on the break. In a lower population area, holding the same movie for 2 or 3 weeks without anything new is bad for business.

Mike,

I don't have any direct experience to what you're asking but I can tell you that more screens is not always the best idea. My single screen has it pretty easy for the most part. I get nearly whatever movie I want anywhere from two to four weeks after the break with the occassional blockbuster on the break (Taken 2 this weekend for instance). With my six screen things are much more complicated and studio politics gets involved. Gonna final a movie from studio A before you do from studio B? Gonna get two movies from studio B and shut out studio C? With six screens you are sort of expected to get nearly everything the studio puts out (Bob's point) good or bad and that can lead you to make some stupid decisions (Won't Back Down and Dredd 3D I'm looking at you). With the single screen I can wait and see how things perform at my six screen as well as nationally before I bring them in there. The bad part comes in when there is too much selection, of course, and you can't bring in everything you want but that is rare these days. The bottom line is it can be done and might be worth it but heed the words of the late great Uncle Ben from Spider Man "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility" because you'll be giving up some things too. Good luck with your decision and let us know what you decide.

The question --- Will it make more money--- yes -- other than an IMax -- verry few single screens make more money as singles . The above statements might be true unless you want $$$$ !

Will it lead to more sales?----Most likely

Will it pay for itself?----That's another question

Will it be more complicated?----Enitrely possible

I'm not for a moment comparing my single screen to my six screen as far as dollars go. The single breaks even and pays for our home, the six screen is what puts bread on the table. What I do know is that the single is far easier to run and book.

revrobor wrote:
So, just to be clear, five screens and up are full of junk? All the six and eight screens in large towns and small cities aren't needed? No room for holdovers? No room for summer and holiday blockbusters? No second prints ever? A lot of operators need to start knocking down auditoriums.
What do I tell the bank?
What will AMC and the other big boys do ?
Bob Nash

What's your point Bob? Are you trying to mock or what and why? Did I say that? I don't think so. I was talking about a specific theatre and offering a specific suggestion.

as Rutger Hauer said in Blade Runner "That's the spirit!" Thanks all. I do believe there is a "right size" a "goldilocks" size. Too small and it doesn't make enough, too big can be too big no matter what size that is. I do know that had we not developed our 3rd screen (we had the empty space in the theatre) we'd be struggling. I'll keep working it.

I have operated one theater only. Started as a twin, then went to three a couple of years later, & then 4 a year or so after that. It was always easier to book as a 4 than a three and a three over a twin. My frustration was higher as a twin without a doubt. My philosophy is such that I could not see myself operating anything less than a 4.

BUT, having to pay for digital equipment without a VPF is a big hurdle that may want me to take a pause for a year or so to see what shakes out.

Leeler is modest. He has a fantastic grossing single screen (top 5% or better I believe). I think you are wise to not mess with its success!

revrobor wrote:
Mr. Allen:

It was not my intent to mock, but to question your specific point : "But I also think you don't need to go beyond four. Too many screens and you may end up booking junk just to have something on the screen."

I apologize if I hurt your feelings. Again, that was not my intent.

Bob Nash

The reality is this: The film world makes films for a 10 or 12 screen world. That is the predominant sized theatre across the USA. There are lots and lots of movies. More at some times than at others. The people who go to the movies are of two schools: those who go rarely and those who go all the time. If you have 2 screens and you are bringing in first run films where you must hold them for 2-3-4 weeks your best customers simply cannot return and attend a film as you do not/ cannot... have a new movie for them. The people who go to the movies regularly (30% of all people) want to go as often as they can, as often as you give them a reason to. To do that: you need more screens. Without having far too many. Right sizing is the mission.