I have just booked 3 tickets for the UGC on line. They have, clearly, added a booking fee of 50p a ticket. What are your views on this? I thought internet purchasing was supposed to be cheaper. UGC have less work to do a result of my booking online. I collect the tickets from a machine so do not need trouble any counter staff. OK, so I don't have to queue either.

Warner Village do not impose a surcharge. I was going to set up a poll but would rather have your opinions

Julie

[billduff]

Booking fees really are a rip off.

UGC are the worst offenders in my book. I am an unlimited card holder but the only way for me to book a ticket is via a 'premium rate' line at nearly £1 for the 3 or 4 mins it takes per seat.

This is the only way to book an 'unlimited' ticket apart from at the box office and you can only book one at a time.

If two of you are going and you both have unlimited cards you have no guarantee of sitting together.

Really is pants. We generally just turn up and see what we can get into.

booking fees for tickets are very common but in reality it is an excuse to make a few quid I suppose the idea is that if you are bothered enough to ring or log on to the net you not going to grumble about paying slightly more for the hassle of not going to the cinema

I actually have the monthly £9.99 pass and UGC have now introduced a new policy on pre booking tickets with the pass

at the cinema you can only book tickets on the same day if you want to book before that you have to phone a premium rate line which costs aprrox 75p per ticket

[Garrett]

I totally agree with you Julie. I pass my cinema on the day I go to see the film so I just pop in and book the seats, but if I did it on line I would expect it to be the same price if not cheaper.
As you say they do not have staff to deal with you, also booking advance guarantees they have the money. If you were un-able to go they will still make that money if you had not booked in advance they may not fill those seats so losing money.
They seem to want it both ways.

[Achy]

Just another reason why I can't wait for Stellios and his Easy Cinema to get going and really shake up cinemas in this country.

Why do multiplexes which have 12 screens show the same film in three of them ?

Why not give some other decent lower budget films a chance and support the industry they are making money from !?! Even if its for one evening a week.

I supposed they'd argue that smaller films don't make as much money, but I went to see the Hulk last week and there were only 5 people in a 300 seater capacity cinema.

Surely the Hulk cost them more money to buy from the distributors than a smaller budget film ?

[PoochJD]

HI,

Pakehurst, you asked: Why do multiplexes which have 12 screens show the same film in three of them ?

There's actually an easy answer to that one, and it's not a nice one.

Basically, the film companies dictate what films are shown and how often they are shown. So, if the makers of "The Hulk" want it to be shown in 3 screens, with 5 showings per day in each of those three screens, to your local UGCor Warner Bros cnema, then the cinema has to play ball, or else they don't get to play the movie at all! Hence, they will loose substanntial revenue, plus risk any chance of getting future films from the same distribution company.

Nowadays, companies like Fox, Disney and Warners are extremely aggresive when it comes to telling cinema chains what must be shown, and in how many screens. Alas, the cinema itself, is piggy in the middle, stuck between ttthe film distribution companies and the paying public.

That's why it's best (if you can) to support local, independent cinemas, rather than big multiplexes run by giant conglomerate companies, who don't really care about the films they show!

Pooch

[Achy]

C'mon then Stelios !

The last I heard he was talking to the Office of Fair Trading and complaining to anti-competition authorities in Brussels about being able to show the blockbuster films on his terms.

If he manages to turn it round will that then "free" the other cinemas?

Probably not....they'll just continue doing what they've always done, as you said most of the cinema chains seem to be owned by the big boys anyway !

Our local independant/flea-pit closed down a couple of years ago.
I don't know where the nearest one is ! London I s'ppose.

[Noodle]

My local showcase imposes a 50p per ticket surcharge to ring an automated tel number & then collect the tickets from a machine.



However....I just order student tickets, which are £1 cheaper, thereby saving 50p.

[Shady]

Warner Village do charge a booking fee - or at least Star City does.


Cheers

When you book as a student do you not have to prove it somehow?

[Indiana Jones]

When I was a student I used to book student tickets online and never once got asked for my NUS card or any other type of proof when handing over the ticket at the cinema, this was a year or so ago so I guess things could have changed but 9 times of 10 you will probaley just be able to walk straight in but there is always the chance they will ask to see some ID and if you dont have it you could get refused entry.

[Lex]

VUE charge 50p per ticket as well. It's a disgrace really as internet tickets should be cheaper than normal tickets as it is all automated. Seems like they are punishing their most loyal customers to me.

I also had problems the other week where I pre-booked two tickets, put my credit in the machine on arrival and it only printed one ticket, even though I had paid for two - I then had to go and get to the back of the ******* queue to try and get my extra ticket. The cashier said that he basically didn't believe me and more or less accused me of trying it on! I missed the beginning of the film, had to queue twice, had grief from the cashier and paid 50p extra for the privilege!!

[Gary D]

Aren't Vue and Warner Villiage one and the same?

The booking fee is just part of the cost of going to the cinema (which i dont do much) i'd rather pay it than queue up on a saturday night.


Gary

[Razor]

Originally Posted by Gary D

Aren't Vue and Warner Villiage one and the same?

The booking fee is just part of the cost of going to the cinema (which i dont do much) i'd rather pay it than queue up on a saturday night.


Gary

Warner sold their cinemas to Vue. Vues plan is to own the cinema chain for 3-4 years, strip all the costs to the bone and then sell it. In their first 6 months they lost loads of money and were forced to sell a few cinemas to pay for the loss. A friend of mine used to be their head accountant.

They didnt want flourecent signs as they cost to much money, stationary was cut back by over 60%, all the expensive parties warner used to throw were stopped etc....

The cinema buisness has taken a bit hit, there has been a drought of good movies (2003/2004). Warner also knew that there was a lean time in good movies coming up this coupled with AOL massive losses they decieded to sell up shop.

Vue are originally a scottish company and before they bought the warner cinema empire they only had a few cinemas. I was told that they were totally out of their depth.

[Lex]

Originally Posted by Gary D

Aren't Vue and Warner Villiage one and the same?

Yeah, if you look at the dates you'll notice that the first half of this thread is a couple of years old, hence people refering to Warner and not Vue