Deluxe "eCinema" delivery service is coming in December

[James Gardiner]

On "DCDC not allowing small cinemas to join the digital delivery network.." I imagine its the same reason they don't allow many small cinemas to join the digital delivery networks. (Like here in Australia)
It basically comes down to this.. As traditionally film prints cost many thousands of dollars, Policy was introduced/allowed by regulators to mitigate the costs of the prints and allowed distributors to decide who got prints first..
This resulted in a.. well I am not going to mention it here.
Even with digital now the norm, the same restrictive access is in place even though the original excuse is no longer relevant.
The distributors need to maintain a viable reason that can be argued in court. To do this they don;t want to give access to digital delivery to small cinemas as it destroys any form of plausible deniability for this behaviour. As such, they use 3rd parties that for reasons they will not supply, to restrict smaller cinemas from digital deliveries of which would then arguably remove any form of defence in court for enforcing a policy or delayed access.

That's the conclusion based on our analysis and discussion with our lawyers of the situation. Its just business I suppose.

[James Gardiner]

Maybe my feeble mind hasn't processed all information Mike provided, but I thought it was quite clear:

- Delivery via snail mail/courrier by Deluxe: $40, used to be $49 per feature
- Delivery via their on-line distribution network: $25 per feature

Small theaters need to provide their own Internet uplink, bigger theaters get their link sponsored (probably limited up to a certain amount).

Over here in Europe, it's usually the distribution company who pays for the actual distribution. So, distribution per both snail mail/courier and on-line service is usually free, unless it concerns a special booking.

Marcel, sorry. In reading the thread, it was made clear that those taking on the eCinema delivery, pay $25 per delivery. No one has indicated that they no longer charge the distributor as well. Are the distributors lowering the MG? I guess not, and I guess they still charge them too. So distributors $40, plus exhibitor $25? This has not been confirmed.

This is all indicative anyway. The cost of distributing a film for a distributor is typically confidential as it could be different for different entities based on volume etc.

But still, I ask as, doing a business analysis of this change in the industry and identifying possible risks etc, like doing any business model. The cost of the distribution is an extremely important issues for exhibitors going forward. Not so much for its cost but the strategic effects. For example. I am not saying this is happening but its a possible risk that needs to be taken on board.

As a base model, a few years ago an GM of a major studio was in court giving evidence on what policy was for.. There is a recording of it flying around in Australia. In his evidence he stated that policy is used to "choke" (His words) smaller competitive content off screen (Typically local and independent content) to ensure their mainstream content fills predominantly as much session space available.. And to reduce the choice etc. (Email me if you want a copy). This identifies a behaviour in some parts of the world that conditions that result in this outcome are actively sort by some areas of the industry. NOTE: I am only the messenger here.
Considering this behaviour, it is prudent to identify potential developments in the industry for which similar outcomes may be strategically achieved.

For example, Not that I think this is intentional but.. If a gatekeeper of content to cinemas was in place, there is the possibility prices for content delivery could be inflated to put pressure onto smaller distributors and limit the number of sites they can opon on. (Remember in the old days how Print costs were a major impediment for indy and local films)

Not saying this is happening, but it is an identifiable risk that a prudent international market should take steps to mitigate. i.e. ensure there are viable alternatives.

Establish who is paying what so strategically it can be identified if such strategic moves are being attempted.

From the friends I have over in Australia, I've learned that Internet connectivity still comes at a premium. Meanwhile, over here, a link with 100 mbit/s download capacity is considered "basic" and is about the minimum you can get with any broadband subscription, setting you back like $30-$50 a month on a $150 install fee... I guess Mike's situation, is somewhat in between...
Still, it's not uncommon for distribution companies to try to control their delivery network, as it's still quite a lot of data they need to transfer. Partnering with some ISPs and putting the content closer to the edges on their network can drive network costs down for both the distributor and the ISP and can ensure sufficient throughput to the end-subscriber.

Also, if the exhibitor decides to put the service on some crappy shared and otherwise overloaded broadband subscription, the experience will be bad for all involved, so it's not unusual for them to ask for a dedicated connection.

I find this argument strange. In the past, cinemas took it on themselves to arrange films to be picked up from dispatch. Distributors were fine with this since forever.
But your saying now they want to control how it gets to the cinemas. I see this move more as a strategic move.

$100 per month, $200 per month, realistically its not an issue about cost. The courier costs and not having to deal with DCP boxes far outweighs such costs.
Partnering with ISP's is not a good path. I know, I tried it in previous projects. ISPs have footprints, and before you know it, your partnering with many ISPs etc.
Your better of getting sites to utilise reputable Internet providers and facilitate hosting your content via locations with well maintained interconnects into the regions these cinemas are in.
And secondly, the internet gets upgraded every day making it cheaper and faster. And ultimately more cost effective.

Managing your own network infrastructure is were a lot of the costs are. If you outsource it, that company expects to make considerable returns on a resource that is becoming cheaper every day. Strategically, as a company its not a good move. You want to profit from this evolution, not an external company. (i.e. there are reasons Apple, for example, controls more of its supply change then anyone else. It has made them the most profitable company in the world.)

It's still not as trivial as sending a KDM, because that involves just a few bytes of information. A DCP is still quite a considerable blob of data and it requires faultless delivery. Not that it's rocket science, but it still requires some non-trivial infrastructure to do this on a large scale.

Yes, I admit, its not trivial. For example, my set of 3 cinemas utilise my own software that implements exactly this requirement. I suppose not many cinema owners are also programmers and have done this.. But it's doable. I know how much it can cost. (Or cheap it can be) The main issue is hosting the content in a way that can meat the potential demand. Again its not that difficult (For me anyway) but its not "that" cheap yet. For example, you cannot expect to put a DCP on Dropbox and have 300 sites download it over a few days. (Firstly that would be super expensive, they charge ridiculous amount for excessive data downloads) and its not a CDN that can scale to the download bandwidth that would generate. (Imagine 300x160gig = 48 terabytes) of traffic over a short period.
There are holesalfe data provider you can utilise, specifically via APIs etc, that make this super cheap. But its not something you can buy of the shelf, you need to control your own IP.

For smaller distributors with limited releases, it's very doable and potentially very cost effective if you have the IP in place.

Also, the studio/distributor already controls the KDM, so, why bother about the delivery method of the DCP? If they don't want you to play the movie, they won't give you the key anyways.

The studios always have been THE gatekeepers in this industry. They own the content, they decide, in large part, who gets to play what and on what terms.

Do you not find it strange how the studios, doing Streaming, own the IP and operate their own distribution networks from top to bottom. Why is that? Because it's the most cost effective is the obvious answer.

So why don't they also do this for DCP delivery. Its trivial compared to the tech going into streaming.
The answer is, because there are strategic business reasons to do so. If you understood what these strategic reason are. You would have a far better understanding of the industry.

[Mike Blakesley]

No one has indicated that they no longer charge the distributor as well. Are the distributors lowering the MG? I guess not, and I guess they still charge them too. So distributors $40, plus exhibitor $25? This has not been confirmed.

Nobody on Film-Tech (that I know of, at least) has much to do with the distribution side of the industry. We are all mostly connected to the exhibition side.

Deluxe has always been paid by the studios to distribute their product, so I'm sure that still happens, regardless of the method used to distribute it.

As to the "why" the studios use a company like Deluxe to do this work, I always assumed it was just because it frees-up the studios from having to deal with individual entities. They just give the product to Deluxe and let them do the logistical work. It's the same as a car dearlership...nobody bus a vehicle directly from Ford or General Motors -- they go to a dealer. Deluxe is basically a dealer for the studios.

If a studio wanted to have its own distribution network for theaters, I can see that happening in the future as data transmission becomes cheaper and faster; but in the short run, it's obviously easier to let somebody else handle that work.

[Carsten Kurz]

Years ago when Gofilex started it's pan-european business, there was an article in cinema-technology magazine about electronic distribution. At the time, Gofilex was very open about their pricing model - 50€ per distributed DCP from the exhibitor, nothing from the cinema. Now that is 5 years ago. I looked up our bookings of 2019, and the average MG that we pay is around 110€. Plus a flat of typically 5-10€ for one sheets, flyers, general distributor provided online advertising resources, etc. and trailer supply (download). Don't know if Gofilex still charges 50€ today. So, from the 110€ MG, that leaves around 50-60€ for distributors other expenses, booking/billing, etc.

That was and is more or less the same when we receive(d) DCPs on disk (even the same when we played 35mm) - just that we had to add 5-10€ to our own expenses for sending the disk back.


- Carsten

[James Gardiner]

Gofilex was very open about their pricing model - 50€ per distributed DCP from the exhibitor, nothing from the cinema. Now that is 5 years ago. I looked up our bookings of 2019, and the average MG that we pay is around 110€. Plus a flat of typically 5-10€ for one sheets, flyers, general distributor provided online advertising resources, etc. and trailer supply (download). Don't know if Gofilex still charges 50€ today. So, from the 110€ MG, that leaves around 50-60€ for distributors other expenses, booking/billing, etc.

Interesting. MG is near double to 3 times that, depending... from my experience. It's a wonder what a little bit of competition will do. But really, MG is a non issue for all but small cinemas...
Personally, I wonder why they bother these days. If its so low now (As digital deliver and digital posters), just keeping track of it and the extra effort needed no longer really makes commercial sense.
The only commercial issue I see MG serving these days is to ensure a cinema takes a proper commitment when taking a film.

However, in general, distributors like having one big chain to deal with and not hundreds of smaller cinemas. They shape the conditions to suite this preference. I just hope they become more flexible in coming months as patrons changing behaviour is likely to make conditions tighter for some time. Regional cinemas appear to be especially effected and are showing weaker attendance then typical metro locations. (Due to COVID hesitancy being more of an issue in regional areas with more older demographics.)

[Mike Blakesley]

I asked Deluxe if they had a "timeline" for equipment delivery because we have a technician coming in for PM and I was hoping to have him here when we install this stuff, and they told me delays are happening due to the supply chain issues....no surprise. So now their servers are scheduled to arrive anytime this month and they're hoping to kick it off in mid January.

[Frank Cox]

If the Deluxe gadget is similar to or the same as the Cinesend gadget, you can easily set it up yourself.

My process for install it consisted of screwing it into the rack, plugging the WAN side into the wire that connects to the big scary world, plugging the LAN wire into the switch that's connected to the projector and associated stuff, turning on the power, and sending an email to Cinesend saying that it's hooked up so they could log into it and finish setting it up.

The hardest part was stringing a new wire from the router into the projection room, but the whole job took less than an afternoon.

[James Gardiner]

If the Deluxe gadget is similar to or the same as the Cinesend gadget, you can easily set it up yourself.

My process for install it consisted of screwing it into the rack, plugging the WAN side into the wire that connects to the big scary world, plugging the LAN wire into the switch that's connected to the projector and associated stuff, turning on the power, and sending an email to Cinesend saying that it's hooked up so they could log into it and finish setting it up.

The hardest part was stringing a new wire from the router into the projection room, but the whole job took less than an afternoon.

Hi Frank,
Discussion of the "Hardware Device" brings up another, against the grain, behaviour here..

If you are well versed in IT and the issue of rolling out infrastructure that runs on computers. You will see a massive trend towards virtualisation or containerisation.
Near all TMS's have been developed (or redeveloped) into targeting linux based servers. Typically utilising docker/container orchestration. (i,e, getting all the services that make a TMS to work together on an orchestrated and reproducible way). This is a big trend as typically if you want to move this infrastructure into the cloud/self hosted whatever, utilising containers or virtual machines is a magnitude easier then historical methods. i.e. so most TMS's are or have moved to be based on these technologies. I base all my software on these technologies so I can easily move it into the cloud if I need to. (i.e. compatible with cubinaties container orchestration all the major cloud providers offer as a service etc)

Cinemas have become specialised IT companies. It all runs on computers and is typically very specialised. So you expect our industry to adopt these wider industry trends.

For example, purchase a nice server, such as a Dell R720 or r730, (Second hand units very cost effective and have 10 years left in them) Drop on a hypervisor such as ProxMox (Free). Run virtual machines and containers, more capable then any multiplex would need. TMS, LMS, POS system, Phone System... everything on the one system, If your paranoid, run a second system as a fall over.
But my point here is that, Deluxe, or GoFlex or whoever.. Should be offering these devices as containerised installs.
It would literally take me 10 mins to install and setup a delivery instance if these companies made it available as a docker container..

And realistically, I am not happy running a small cheapest possible Dell server with a 4TB disk in it as the catch device. Sitting there eating more power and utilising no fault tolerant hardware, non commercial grade hardware... (Also note, in Australia I know cinemas with three, yes three of these devices eating power and doing next to nothing most of the time.. I could not think of a better function to be visualised to save power and money)

But unfortunately, they force this on us smaller cinemas. (I can tell you the big chains don;t put up with this.)

I must admit, it makes me angry. I spend all this time doing this right. And then get told I have to use a toy. And typically, these BOXES, utilise containers/docker to run the software ANYWAY... They just force us to utilise their hardware.. What happen if it fails??

What happens if your network fails at the Cinema. You go home and download the KDMs there. But now with digital DCP delivery..... if that happens and they only support this custom device.. If the device fails they fall back to physical delivery.... that, in the end will get used so little (As the internet tends to be that reliable) that it may not work when it needs to.. When going home and downloading the DCP that is intentionally made impossible.

Sorry, but I find these artificial limitations makes no sense. Sure make a box available for those who want it, but don't artificially restrict these other paths to ensuring a dark screen does not occur.

We need to, as a group, pushback on some of these restrictive and technically in accurate paths.

[Barry Floyd]

May I ask..
From my understanding, DCDC (or equivalent digital delivery solutions by Deluxe and others) was $49 per delivery to the distributor. Is this $25 on top of that costs? I fail to see the reason for them to drop the costs to the distributor only to raise the cinema cost (Who is already charged via the MG that contributes the the distributor cost). I suppose the question is. Exactly what is the total costs, exhibitor and distributor now under the eCinema cost structure?.

For us, we are consistently paying DCDC about $18 per title booked, don't know or really care what the studio pays. That's why we went with it. It was roughly half of what we were paying for hard drive delivery.

[Darin Steffl]

eCinema does NOT require fiber internet. It just requires a 100 Mbps download from any internet provider with unlimited data. It can be Fiber, Cable, DSL, WISP, Satellite (Starlink preferably), or Cellular.

In our area, we can get 100 Mbps fiber for $59 per month or Cable 200 Mbps for $100. We've also tested T-Mobile's Fixed Wireless product which is $50 per month with no upfront fees or contracts and on our local tower which has Band 41 deployed, we see 400 Mbps down and 75 Mbps upload for only $50!!! I've linked to their eligibility tool below if you want to try it. You can sign up as a business with EIN number or order under a residential account with a social security.

If your Theatre doesn't have any good options, Starlink is available with speeds from 100-400 Mbps download for $99 per month and $600 upfront (tax and shipping included) but you'll probably be in preorder status with estimated shipping in 2022.

All I see are lots of options for fast internet out there and more to come when the Build Back Better bill is signed that allocated $65 billion for broadband in the US.

My primary business is running my WISP, which provides free 200/200 Mbps speeds to my single screen theatre, which is a hobby for me right now. Hoping to get the eCinema gear as soon as possible.

https://www.t-mobile.com/isp/eligibi...annel=business

[Marcel Birgelen]

If you are well versed in IT and the issue of rolling out infrastructure that runs on computers. You will see a massive trend towards virtualisation or containerisation.
Near all TMS's have been developed (or redeveloped) into targeting linux based servers. Typically utilising docker/container orchestration. (i,e, getting all the services that make a TMS to work together on an orchestrated and reproducible way). This is a big trend as typically if you want to move this infrastructure into the cloud/self hosted whatever, utilising containers or virtual machines is a magnitude easier then historical methods. i.e. so most TMS's are or have moved to be based on these technologies. I base all my software on these technologies so I can easily move it into the cloud if I need to. (i.e. compatible with cubinaties container orchestration all the major cloud providers offer as a service etc)

Cinemas have become specialised IT companies. It all runs on computers and is typically very specialised. So you expect our industry to adopt these wider industry trends.

For example, purchase a nice server, such as a Dell R720 or r730, (Second hand units very cost effective and have 10 years left in them) Drop on a hypervisor such as ProxMox (Free). Run virtual machines and containers, more capable then any multiplex would need. TMS, LMS, POS system, Phone System... everything on the one system, If your paranoid, run a second system as a fall over.
But my point here is that, Deluxe, or GoFlex or whoever.. Should be offering these devices as containerised installs.
It would literally take me 10 mins to install and setup a delivery instance if these companies made it available as a docker container..

And realistically, I am not happy running a small cheapest possible Dell server with a 4TB disk in it as the catch device. Sitting there eating more power and utilising no fault tolerant hardware, non commercial grade hardware... (Also note, in Australia I know cinemas with three, yes three of these devices eating power and doing next to nothing most of the time.. I could not think of a better function to be visualised to save power and money)

But unfortunately, they force this on us smaller cinemas. (I can tell you the big chains don;t put up with this.)

I must admit, it makes me angry. I spend all this time doing this right. And then get told I have to use a toy. And typically, these BOXES, utilise containers/docker to run the software ANYWAY... They just force us to utilise their hardware.. What happen if it fails??

What happens if your network fails at the Cinema. You go home and download the KDMs there. But now with digital DCP delivery..... if that happens and they only support this custom device.. If the device fails they fall back to physical delivery.... that, in the end will get used so little (As the internet tends to be that reliable) that it may not work when it needs to.. When going home and downloading the DCP that is intentionally made impossible.

Sorry, but I find these artificial limitations makes no sense. Sure make a box available for those who want it, but don't artificially restrict these other paths to ensuring a dark screen does not occur.

We need to, as a group, pushback on some of these restrictive and technically in accurate paths.

Cinemas are not hospitals. You don't need triple redundancy to do your business, it's usually better to take some risk. Do you have two projectors in every booth? Do you have an N+1 or even 2N redundant power setup? The answer is no, because it's too damn expensive.

The same is true for e.g. a fully blown VMWare setup for every cinema. Even if you go for something that's a bit cheaper in licensing for a hypervisor solution, you're still paying for the maintenance and the hardware. And for what? A TMS service? A content library? Every modern Series 2 or later setup has the server right there inside the projector, it's all about minimizing footprint. The next step will be eliminating the dedicated audio processor.

As for those content delivery parties delivering their own boxes and even their own connectivity: I'm perfectly fine with that. You know why? It gives a clear demarcation point defining who is responsible for what. They can't point at my servers, my SAN, my provider, my firewall or my toilet brush for their own problems. If their shit doesn't work, it's their problem, not mine. It saves me the ordeal of debugging my own hard- and software, just to prove them everything is fine there... In this particular case, Deluxe already promised to send DCPs via courier if digital delivery fails. To me, that sounds like a perfect backup solution, one which is entirely independent from the primary form of delivery.

[James Gardiner]

Cinemas are not hospitals. You don't need triple redundancy to do your business, it's usually better to take some risk. Do you have two projectors in every booth? Do you have an N+1 or even 2N redundant power setup? The answer is no, because it's too damn expensive.

The same is true for e.g. a fully blown VMWare setup for every cinema. Even if you go for something that's a bit cheaper in licensing for a hypervisor solution, you're still paying for the maintenance and the hardware. And for what? A TMS service? A content library? Every modern Series 2 or later setup has the server right there inside the projector, it's all about minimizing footprint. The next step will be eliminating the dedicated audio processor.

As for those content delivery parties delivering their own boxes and even their own connectivity: I'm perfectly fine with that. You know why? It gives a clear demarcation point defining who is responsible for what. They can't point at my servers, my SAN, my provider, my firewall or my toilet brush for their own problems. If their shit doesn't work, it's their problem, not mine. It saves me the ordeal of debugging my own hard- and software, just to prove them everything is fine there... In this particular case, Deluxe already promised to send DCPs via courier if digital delivery fails. To me, that sounds like a perfect backup solution, one which is entirely independent from the primary form of delivery.

In my example I refer to second had R720 or R730, you can pickup for a song. Every cinema needs a POS, most cinemas need a TMS. The integrators here like to sell a $30k package just for the TMS. $5k should be enough if you know what your doing.
Proxmox is Free. Its not VMware but its plenty good enough and can do the same job for a Cinema needs.

You say you like letting the service provider take care of these issues. Well, they have techs looking after all this infrastructure costing a good amount to make someone good profits. You may be happy handing that problem to someone else but at the end of the day, it is your ticket sales paying for it. Directly or indirectly through the distributor who pays for the service. And fine to be happy with that but be informed that it is happening and it does affect the industry in the way it operates.

It is well documented that a business should keep core competencies in house. Otherwise its not your business, your just a service agent sitting in the middle. Dealing with deliveries of content is a core competency of running a cinema. From my perspective I would prefer to keep this task in house. For example, many larger chains in the U.S. take a single delivery from the studios/distributors and distribute it internally on there own controlled infrastructure as they see advantages in doing this. It is a core competency of being a cinema.

I'll admit I talk to a lot of cinema owners who have a similar opinion to yourself. However, as they mature and grow in understanding of how this all works. They tend to change their mind. i.e. as is demonstrated by the larger chains taking this competency in house. However, single site small cinemas don't really see much advantage. Its the multi site chains that really prefer taking this competency onboard.

[Marcel Birgelen]

In my example I refer to second had R720 or R730, you can pickup for a song. Every cinema needs a POS, most cinemas need a TMS. The integrators here like to sell a $30k package just for the TMS. $5k should be enough if you know what your doing.
Proxmox is Free. Its not VMware but its plenty good enough and can do the same job for a Cinema needs.

Proxmox is as free as ESXi is free, it may come with some more features out of the box for free, but in the end, you need a tech to manage such a setup. In the end, Proxmox requires a paid license too, if you want some kind of support. If you're a multiplex, well, fine, implement a redundant VM cluster on your premises by buying two or thee machines with sufficient cores and a SAN, but why would a single screen require such expensive infrastructure? Who's going to manage it for them?

We've been running our own VM infrastructure on premises and in a local datacenter for years. I've had countless of discussions with suppliers that always started with blaming their own failures on our infrastructure... It's your VM host, it's your SAN, it's your network, it has to be your firewall... Now, we're sufficiently equipped to deal with this, but why would you even want this if you're just a single screen?

You say you like letting the service provider take care of these issues. Well, they have techs looking after all this infrastructure costing a good amount to make someone good profits. You may be happy handing that problem to someone else but at the end of the day, it is your ticket sales paying for it. Directly or indirectly through the distributor who pays for the service. And fine to be happy with that but be informed that it is happening and it does affect the industry in the way it operates.

You think your own time is free? What if you don't have a clue about it? Then you need to hire somebody else to look at it. Running a business is learning that you can only focus on so many things a day and you need either good people or partners to focus on all the little details.

It is well documented that a business should keep core competencies in house. Otherwise its not your business, your just a service agent sitting in the middle. Dealing with deliveries of content is a core competency of running a cinema. From my perspective I would prefer to keep this task in house. For example, many larger chains in the U.S. take a single delivery from the studios/distributors and distribute it internally on there own controlled infrastructure as they see advantages in doing this. It is a core competency of being a cinema.

There are scaling advantages if you're a chain and implement internal distribution infrastructure on that level. You're also in a whole other position when it comes down to negotiating terms with telecoms and fiber operators when you're going to procure services like MPLS, managed wavelengths and dark fiber services to roll out an internal distribution network, compared to a single screen operation... Also, you probably have a bunch of night-dwellers on NOC duty already, so they can also monitor your WAN for you...

I'll admit I talk to a lot of cinema owners who have a similar opinion to yourself. However, as they mature and grow in understanding of how this all works. They tend to change their mind. i.e. as is demonstrated by the larger chains taking this competency in house. However, single site small cinemas don't really see much advantage. Its the multi site chains that really prefer taking this competency onboard.

I'm technically not a cinema owner, we do own a screening room though... Maybe because they realize that they should focus on the things they're good at. There isn't a lot of money to be saved here for them anyway. What do you expect from them? To hire highly paid IT techs? What's next? Some highly qualified hardware engineers that can diagnose defective boards in defective hardware? They're far better of ensuring they work with qualified parties that can deliver the services when they need them...

[James Gardiner]

Proxmox is as free as ESXi is free, it may come with some more features out of the box for free, but in the end, you need a tech to manage such a setup. In the end, Proxmox requires a paid license too, if you want some kind of support. If you're a multiplex, well, fine, implement a redundant VM cluster on your premises by buying two or thee machines with sufficient cores and a SAN, but why would a single screen require such expensive infrastructure? Who's going to manage it for them?

We've been running our own VM infrastructure on premises and in a local datacenter for years. I've had countless of discussions with suppliers that always started with blaming their own failures on our infrastructure... It's your VM host, it's your SAN, it's your network, it has to be your firewall... Now, we're sufficiently equipped to deal with this, but why would you even want this if you're just a single screen?

1 screen .. 4 screen. They are all running a POS on a computer and have all the support issue already. This discussion is not about if a cinema owner should do or not do something.
This discussion is about cost savings by using a better path. For example, All major TMS are now Linux based utilising containers. Azure the Microsoft cloud services.., has far more linux instances then Windows.
There are cost saving reasons the industry is moving this way. So I am pointing them out here. But at the end of the day, the best solution is the solution the cinema owners is most comfortable with.

Proxmox has far more capability in its free version. VMware is especially annoying these days as they have dropped kernel support for divers in common older equipment, meaning to run the current (secure and bug fixed) version you have to purchase modern super expensive hardware.

Also ProxMox, has all its features, the cost layer is for premium support. A common path for popular and good open source based software.
The main reason I prefer Proxmox these days is because it is easy to implement backup infrastructure. VMware, you really need to purchase it to get that functionality.

Most cinemas do not have great fail over support. But at least its a cost effective option with Proxmox.. If they want to invest in that.

Traditionally a small cinema owner would take on much of their servicing work and other expensive requirements for a small cinema as a way to save substantial money. That opportunity is now gone. The security aspects of projectors and their complexity makes that unviable. But a small cinema owner can still save substantial money if they take on board some of the complex requirement modern business have, Such as managing IT infrastructure.

Most small cinemas run a TMS as it was a requirement for the VPF (As the VPF agent would suck out required data from the TMS). But then again, small cinemas not on the VPF tended to not use a TMS.
However, even though doing a lot of the TMS work by hand is not that hard, it still an area much time could be saved doing more effective work such as promotions etc.

Considering the difficult times ahead, I would encourage a cinema owner to look at options to adapt to the market.

You think your own time is free? What if you don't have a clue about it? Then you need to hire somebody else to look at it. Running a business is learning that you can only focus on so many things a day and you need either good people or partners to focus on all the little details.

Yes, being a business man is being well informed and selecting the best path forward. Being well informed and having an understanding of core competencies is a major part of this. Is this not what we are discussing?

There are scaling advantages if you're a chain and implement internal distribution infrastructure on that level. You're also in a whole other position when it comes down to negotiating terms with telecoms and fiber operators when you're going to procure services like MPLS, managed wavelengths and dark fiber services to roll out an internal distribution network, compared to a single screen operation... Also, you probably have a bunch of night-dwellers on NOC duty already, so they can also monitor your WAN for you...

I don't really agree with this stance. You shouldn't need to worry about much of this technical dept. A decent Internet link from a reputable ISP at 50 mbit or above is all a cinema owners needs to be worried about. MPLS and all this super expensive WAN historical implementations are over. SDN implementation over generic ISP internet links are taking over. But for a cinema owner, generic Internet connections will, in most cases now, or tomorrow, be all they need.

I'm technically not a cinema owner, we do own a screening room though... Maybe because they realize that they should focus on the things they're good at. There isn't a lot of money to be saved here for them anyway. What do you expect from them? To hire highly paid IT techs? What's next? Some highly qualified hardware engineers that can diagnose defective boards in defective hardware? They're far better of ensuring they work with qualified parties that can deliver the services when they need them...

They already hire paid IT techs for their current implementations. I am just informing them of what trends are occurring in the industry and why they should be aware of them.
I personally, as a cinema owner, do consider there to be a consider amount of money to be saved.

As cinemas are now specialised IT infrastructure companies, I do think its beneficial they become more involved and knowledgeable in running the core infrastructure they depend on.

One of the main reason I created much of the ************ videos was I kept seeing, opinions of convenience, in terms of how service providers informed (Or misinformed) cinema owners.
I always say in my videos, "An informed decision is the right decision"

Many of the readers here come for that alternate opinion, hopefully without any conflicts of interests.
I am not selling anything here. I am just a cinema owners who ran a large integrator, who has been on a Public company board, how has owned a visual FX company.. and ultimately is a programmer who likes to build things.

[Marcel Birgelen]

1 screen .. 4 screen. They are all running a POS on a computer and have all the support issue already. This discussion is not about if a cinema owner should do or not do something.
This discussion is about cost savings by using a better path. For example, All major TMS are now Linux based utilising containers. Azure the Microsoft cloud services.., has far more linux instances then Windows.
There are cost saving reasons the industry is moving this way. So I am pointing them out here. But at the end of the day, the best solution is the solution the cinema owners is most comfortable with.

Yeah, if you're Netflix and run hundred thousands of instances of something, there are some pretty nice cost savings by running this on Linux rather than on Windows and paying Microsoft for the privilege. Did you know that the likes of Netflix are paying anything between $250K to $500K per software engineer though?

For your average cinema, saving on a few Windows licenses left or right really doesn't really impact to anything substantial, especially compared to the costs of proper support on those systems. As for stuff moving into micro-services and into containers... Yeah, l don't think this is the right place to discuss that. I'm not seeing any cinema owner "orchestrating" docker containers provided by their suppliers...

Proxmox has far more capability in its free version. VMware is especially annoying these days as they have dropped kernel support for divers in common older equipment, meaning to run the current (secure and bug fixed) version you have to purchase modern super expensive hardware.

Also ProxMox, has all its features, the cost layer is for premium support. A common path for popular and good open source based software.
The main reason I prefer Proxmox these days is because it is easy to implement backup infrastructure. VMware, you really need to purchase it to get that functionality.

Most cinemas do not have great fail over support. But at least its a cost effective option with Proxmox.. If they want to invest in that.

The entire point is: Small cinemas don't really have that many services running that need expensive on-premises virtualization hard- and software. Virtualization may be great if you have like 15 or more servers running, but I don't see all that much more hardware entering the cinema premises, pretty much the opposite, where stuff increasingly moves into the cloud. If that's a good development may be another discussion, but that's not the one we're having here.

A virtualization layer adds complexity and overhead. Virtualization is only a cost-saver if you do it at a certain scale, I simply don't see that scale in your average cinema. Even for modern multiplexes, the amount of services you need such a layer for is starting to run thin...

Traditionally a small cinema owner would take on much of their servicing work and other expensive requirements for a small cinema as a way to save substantial money. That opportunity is now gone. The security aspects of projectors and their complexity makes that unviable. But a small cinema owner can still save substantial money if they take on board some of the complex requirement modern business have, Such as managing IT infrastructure.

If you're interested in IT, happen to be an IT pro or happen to have affinity with IT: fine. But most cinema owners I know, don't have any such affinity and they don't want to become IT pros. Most company owners I know don't have any affinity with IT and all the aspects, that' why they hire external IT firms. But even with all that knowledge, I would still be extremely careful with introducing complex infrastructure where none is needed, because what happens if I'm on vacation? If I hit a tree on the way home and are unable to work for a few months? Who is going to keep the place running when I'm not around?

Most small cinemas run a TMS as it was a requirement for the VPF (As the VPF agent would suck out required data from the TMS). But then again, small cinemas not on the VPF tended to not use a TMS.
However, even though doing a lot of the TMS work by hand is not that hard, it still an area much time could be saved doing more effective work such as promotions etc.

Considering the difficult times ahead, I would encourage a cinema owner to look at options to adapt to the market.

Adapting to the market is all great, but I don't see how becoming an IT professional has anything to do with exhibitors adapting to the market, other than saying: screw you, I'm done with exhibition, I'm going to do IT now... As stated before, I don't see any cost savings for small theater operations by in-sourcing a dedicated IT department. Good IT folks aren't plenty and they aren't cheap either.

Yes, being a business man is being well informed and selecting the best path forward. Being well informed and having an understanding of core competencies is a major part of this. Is this not what we are discussing?

To me it looks like you want to push the narrative that the only way forward for the small cinema owner is to become an IT expert...

I don't really agree with this stance. You shouldn't need to worry about much of this technical dept. A decent Internet link from a reputable ISP at 50 mbit or above is all a cinema owners needs to be worried about. MPLS and all this super expensive WAN historical implementations are over. SDN implementation over generic ISP internet links are taking over. But for a cinema owner, generic Internet connections will, in most cases now, or tomorrow, be all they need.

I really don't know what you agree upon and what not anymore... Maybe you should start reading my posts first before making wrong assumptions?

As cinemas are now specialised IT infrastructure companies, I do think its beneficial they become more involved and knowledgeable in running the core infrastructure they depend on.

By that definition, practically any company out there is now a specialized IT infrastructure company. I can't even buy a banana from the local grocery store without a chain of complex IT systems doing their thing...

My car is a highly sophisticated collection of technology. I understand the basic operation of the thing and if I really would want to, I'd probably understand a lot of the many little technical details of all the systems operating inside of it. I need my car to do my business, yet I don't service my car myself, I let others do that. Some of those servicing my car probably understand a lot less about technology than I do, yet, I'm mostly fine with that, because I don't want to bother myself with that, I have a lot of other stuff to focus on.

I am not selling anything here. I am just a cinema owners who ran a large integrator, who has been on a Public company board, how has owned a visual FX company.. and ultimately is a programmer who likes to build things.

You should be able to understand that not everybody is an IT expert and certainly not a programmer and most cinema owners probably don't have the aspiration to become one of those either.