|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: iPic sues Regal and AMC, citing 'anti-competitive activities'
|
Jason McMillan
Film Handler
Posts: 68
From: Houston, TX, USA
Registered: Dec 2009
|
posted 11-18-2015 10:16 AM
Looks like someone's up to their old tricks again...
This iPic has been open less than a month. It is 4.5 miles from AMC Studio 30, and 1.5 miles from Edwards Greenway 24, and 4.2 miles from Edwards Marq 22+Imax.
It's interesting to note that AMC is also being sued by the investors of the former Viva Cinemas (2.6 Miles, and was targeting the Spanish market) that was near the AMC Studio 30 here in town for the same reason.
http://www.chron.com/business/retail/article/iPic-files-lawsuit-against-Regal-and-AMC-citing-6639244.php
quote:
Luxury movie theater company iPic says it has filed a lawsuit in Harris County charging that two other theater companies are blocking iPic's ability to obtain first-run films, shutting it out of local competition.
The lawsuit, filed Tuesday afternoon in state district court, claims Regal and AMC are using their position in the market to prevent iPic from licensing films to run in the same market at the same time. It alleges the two companies are doing this by coercing studios to exclude smaller theater chains from running the films.
IPic claims both Regal and AMC have threatened boycotts of specific movie studios if smaller theaters are given licensing rights to such releases, according to a statement from iPic.
"The boycott forces studios to choose between playing films in Regal's and AMC's theaters or iPic's theaters, despite their preference to play the films at all locations," the iPic announcement says, citing the lawsuit.
Florida-based iPic opened its Houston theater at the River Oaks District luxury shopping and residential development on Westheimer Road earlier this month.
The Chronicle is attempting to reach AMC and Regal for comment.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin McCaffery
Film God
Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 01-25-2016 01:15 PM
First Round Goes to iPic
Original Story
quote:
iPic Wins Injunction From Houston Court Will Prevent Further Anti-Competitive Activities By Regal
Information contained on this page is provided by an independent third-party content provider. WorldNow and this Station make no warranties or representations in connection therewith. If you have any questions or comments about this page please contact pressreleases@worldnow.com.
SOURCE iPic Entertainment
BOCA RATON, Fla., Jan. 25, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- iPic®, a pioneering industry leader of award-winning night-out entertainment destinations that include luxury movie theaters and restaurants, today announced that it has secured an injunction from a Texas court that prevents Regal Entertainment (NYSE: RGC) from continuing to engage in anticompetitive "clearances" as part of Regal's efforts to prevent the licensing of first-run movies to iPic's theater in Houston, Texas.
In a lawsuit filed in November 2015 in the 234th District Court in Harris County, Texas (Hon. Wesley Ward, presiding), iPic sought a temporary injunction order to halt unfair and anticompetitive business practices by Regal, the largest theater circuit in the nation. Regal has been using its dominant market position to prevent the licensing of first-run films to iPic® in Houston that would be played in the same market at the same time, an effort calculated to cripple the Houston iPic theater from competing.
In the two months since the new iPic Houston theater has been open, Regal has illegally and repeatedly coerced studios to exclude iPic's theater from being able to show popular first-run films including "The Hateful 8," "Ride Along 2," and "The Revenant." In addition the lawsuit recounts specific other examples around the country where Regal threatened boycotts of specific movie studios, and the first-run films they produce, if smaller boutique theaters were given licensing rights to such releases.
"iPic is extremely pleased that the Court ordered Regal to immediately stop its anticompetitive campaign," Hamid Hashemi, President & CEO of iPic Entertainment said. "We're thrilled to be able to play all pictures at our iPic theater in the River Oaks District. This is good for our guests, for the industry, and for iPic."
The court found the boutique, luxury iPic theater not to be in "substantial competition" with the Regal Greenway Grand Palace Stadium 24, and ordered Regal to refrain from demanding "clearances" by which the studios refuse to license the same movies to the iPic theater that play in the Regal Greenway Palace.
iPic Theaters is credited with pioneering a differentiated movie experience enabling guests to enjoy their movies in ultimate comfort and style with the option of Premium or Premium Plus patented seating pods, courtesy pillows and blankets and individual service-call buttons that summon ninja-like servers to deliver signature dishes and hand-crafted cocktails to your seat in addition to other luxury amenities.
Guests can indulge in iPic's gourmet chef-driven dining concept by acclaimed three-time James Beard award-winning chef Sherry Yard and hand crafted farm-to-glass cocktails by Advanced Mixologist/Sommelier Adam Seger.
Earlier this year it was reported that the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice and at least 10 State Attorneys General are investigating the competitive practices of Regal, AMC, and Cinemark, among others, regarding these types of exclusionary boycott demands and potential violations of federal antitrust laws.
About iPic®
Established through its predecessor in 2006 and headquartered in Boca Raton, FL, iPic-Gold Class Entertainment, LLC, (iPic®) is regarded as the nation's fastest-growing affordable luxury movie theater brand. A pioneering industry leader, iPic®'s mission is to provide visionary, entertainment escapes, presenting high quality, chef-driven culinary and mixology in unique destinations that include premium movie theaters and award-winning restaurants. iPic® Theaters currently operates 13 locations with 97 screens in Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin – with new locations planned for South Florida, Texas, New Jersey, Connecticut, and New York. Please visit us at www.ipic.com.
Press/Media Contact:
Michelle Soudry
561-750-3500
msoudry@thegabgroup.com
To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ipic-wins-injunction-from-houston-court-will-prevent-further-anti-competitive-activities-by-regal-300208906.html
©2015 PR Newswire. All Rights Reserved.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin McCaffery
Film God
Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 01-27-2016 10:42 AM
And Landmark Piles On:
Washington City Paper
quote:
Landmark Theatres Sues Regal, Claims Chain Has Stranglehold on Movies in D.C.
Posted by Matt Cohen on January 27, 2016 at 8:00 am
With the opening of Landmark Theatres' Atlantic Plumbing location last October—the latest opening in D.C.’s current and future cinema boom—friendly competition among the District’s movie theater chains seemed inevitable. Apparently, it's not so friendly.
Yesterday, Landmark filed suit in federal court against Regal Cinemas—the largest movie theater circuit in the country—alleging that it holds a monopoly in showing first-run commercial movies in D.C., something detrimental to Landmark's success in the District, specifically at its new Atlantic Plumbing theater.
According to the lawsuit, which singles out Regal’s Gallery Place theater, “Regal has used its national circuit power, its dominant presence in the greater D.C. area, and its monopoly power in the relevant markets to coerce film distributors to deprive Landmark, its competitor in the relevant markets of fair competitive access to commercial films to exhibit to the public at its competing theater, all as a means of perpetuating and enlarging its circuit power and monopoly power in the relevant markets and of insulating itself from competition on the merits.”
Landmark, primarily, is an indie theater chain that typically programs smaller indie and foreign films that wouldn’t normally play at Regal Cinemas (hence why this lawsuit has never come up before, even with Gallery Place's close proximity to Landmark’s E Street Cinema). But with its new, lush Atlantic Plumbing theater, Landmark says they want to program “desirable, commercial, ‘first run,’ feature-length motion pictures” and that Regal’s monopoly power makes it so that exhibitors won’t license the film rights to them for screening within the market.
For filmgoers looking to see new commercial films in that market, which the lawsuit describes as the “District Core” (basically, downtown D.C. and the surrounding Northwest neighborhoods), the only option is Regal Gallery Place. But Landmark’s Atlantic Plumbing theater wants to be that second option for filmgoers, and one that it says is far more desirable than Regal’s Gallery Place theater.
The suit details poor consumer experiences at Gallery Place as “typical,” highlighting “long ticket and concession lines, large, loud, and unpleasant crowds (including teens and children) that can destroy the movie-going experience, a virtually constant police presence, sold-out shows, exorbitantly priced concessions, ticket price surcharges/fees, bag searches, dirty bathrooms, and standard (non-plush/oversized seatings.” The lawsuit goes on to list specific examples of consumers' reports: “When seeing comedies, there tends to be a disproportionately huge number of annoyingly whooping, talking, and texting teens;” “Two out of three times, someone will be in there w[ith] their crying baby, loud kids shouting… or on the phone during the movie.”
Meanwhile, with its reserved seating, 40-seat bar, and swanky lounge area that resembles a “a tricked out Restoration Hardware ad," the Atlantic Plumbing theater is attempting to cater to different filmgoing crowd. But Regal’s alleged monopoly on commercial films is making it hard for Landmark to program its Atlantic Plumbing theater the way it wants to.
According to the lawsuit, Landmark sought the licenses to show films such as Star Wars: The Force Awakens, The Hunger Games: Mockingjay, Part 2, Spectre, Burnt, and Our Brand Is Crisis at its Atlantic Plumbing theater, only to have each distributor refuse the license “because Regal’s Gallery Place had demanded an exclusive license for the film and had informed the distributor that it would not play the film at its Gallery Place theater if the film were licensed to Landmark’s Atlantic Plumbing theater."
Additionally, in the few cases where Landmark was granted the license to show commercial films at Atlantic Plumbing–for Steve Jobs, Love the Coopers, and Miss You Already—Regal allegedly refused to play the films at Gallery Place, the suit claims.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-27-2016 02:12 PM
In the case of the Regal and Landmark locations in downtown D.C., it's easy to understand how the two theaters could get involved in an allocation setup. Both are located less than half a mile from each other, just a few blocks apart. It has been common practice for movie studios to divide their releases between two first run theaters in close proximity with one location getting one movie and the other location getting the next release. Regal would run into trouble if it took steps to hog most or all of the major studio releases to itself.
It's possible the movie studios' booking departments simply assumed this new Landmark location was yet another art house theater. What steps did Landmark take to make major studios know this theater was geared more for major studio releases?
quote: Brad Miller
This nonsense would all go away if zoning would be removed. Just let everyone play whatever they want to play.
With movie prints all copied to reusable hard drives there are no practical reasons against letting theaters do just that. The situation may have been different back when every theater was showing film. But even then I can recall some new event releases that had several thousand 35mm prints playing in the US alone, with some multiplex locations showing the same movie on half a dozen screens or even more. To me it didn't look like it bothered the studios at all to order a ridiculous number of film prints, even if many of them were shredded only a couple weeks after being produced.
The only legit reason I can see against letting each theater location play whatever it wants to play is movie going choices could become even more limited than they are now. Major movie studios don't care about that of course.
quote: Washington City Paper article
The suit details poor consumer experiences at Gallery Place as “typical,” highlighting “long ticket and concession lines, large, loud, and unpleasant crowds (including teens and children) that can destroy the movie-going experience, a virtually constant police presence, sold-out shows, exorbitantly priced concessions, ticket price surcharges/fees, bag searches, dirty bathrooms, and standard (non-plush/oversized seatings.” The lawsuit goes on to list specific examples of consumers' reports: “When seeing comedies, there tends to be a disproportionately huge number of annoyingly whooping, talking, and texting teens;” “Two out of three times, someone will be in there w[ith] their crying baby, loud kids shouting… or on the phone during the movie.”
I could not help but laugh at this. All those complaints listed above could apply to almost any theater, especially rude or inconsiderate crowd behavior. There's only so much a movie theater can do to maintain order. What is Landmark going to do to make it so much different than the Regal location nearby? Regarding the police presence at the Regal location, I would hope Landmark would have some decent security at their downtown DC theater too. I mean, it's freaking downtown Washington, DC. That sure isn't Mayberry, NC.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
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