Seeking Alpha

Larry Meyers

View as an RSS Feed
View Larry Meyers' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    For heaven's sake -- I've seen more IMAX films than I can count. I saw the first short film about The Alamo at an IMAX theatre in San Antonio, probably before you were born.

    That you somehow draw the conclusion that I've never seen an IMAX movie is not just irresponsible, it's psychotic.
    Jun 15 09:42 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    Some good thoughts here. However, the analogies don't quite work. Item #1: Good content is not cyclical. It's random. Hollywood has shown no ability to innovate, and what you speak of has really very little to do with IMAX.

    Item #2: The difference is this: Restaurants generate repeat business, sometimes on a daily basis, and are constantly expanding and changing their menu. IMAX offers one product -- movies. The film may change, but if a film is bad it's like New Coke.

    Item #3: I don't dispute that my thesis may be flawed on the international side. However, what proof do you have that these emerging economies will have disposable income and that they'll choose to spend it on an IMAX movie?
    Jun 15 09:41 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    Sorry, Charlie, but it's you who is not doing the math right. You forget that IMAX does not get 15% of ALL revenue, but only revenue from THEIR SCREENS, which at most make up 6.5% of any given release. 6.5% times 15% is about 1%.
    Jun 15 09:38 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    FYI - learn to do some math. IMAX is, at most, 6.5% of screens. You forgot to factor that in. 6.5% times 15% times $2.8 billion is $28 million.
    Jun 15 09:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    Your rebuttals are all over the place and make no sense. My point is that not every film is going to be Avatar. In fact, most won't even come close. There will be hits, yes, but one third of this year's slate will fail to generate any substantial revenue. Do you really think every year that every film will generate big $? Are you willing to bet on the quality of the content? Because people DO care.

    You also didn't address the other arguments.
    Jun 15 09:31 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    Of course. Anyone who actually responds intelligently deserves a comprehensive response.

    1. 75% of a movie’s revenue = 1st 2 weeks

    False. The true amounts range between 40% and 67%. Only some horror films hit this mark. Avatar was 40%. Alice in Wonderland was 67%. What is your source?

    2. You watch comedies and dramas at home. The theater experience for action movies is unparalleled. Number of action movies per year = plenty.

    This may be true, but it does not directly address my argument that IMAX cannot optimize theatre capacity to content. Furthermore, there are plenty of action films that are not IMAXed.

    3. Avatar generated $240M of box office in 262 IMAX theaters

    False. Global Avatar Box office was just over $200 million. Of that amount, only 10-15% went to IMAX. Avatar is the most successful film ever. Few, if any, films will match its success. Most don't even come close.

    4. IMAX revenue from the Q12010 (quarter of Avatar): $19M from JV, $24M from DMR

    See #3. Not all films will perform like this. Case in point: Q1 of 2011 IMAX reported a LOSS. Without a massive success like Avatar, IMAX revenue model is lacking.

    5. They now have 400 theaters in operation, 300 in backlog.

    So what? How does that address any of my arguments that even 1250 theatres won't make a difference.

    6. Their current 1200 theater target puts Apple’s conservative guidance to shame.

    Apple? Huh?

    7. Their guidance of 600 domestic screens is based on 1 screen per zone. Exhibitors will want at least 2 per zone within the next 2 years; eventually IMAX becomes the standard screen.

    Source for this claim? How do you leap from 1 to 2 to "the standard"? Have you been to a multiplex recently? How many multiplex auditoriums could fit even a fake IMAX screen? Answer: not many. Further, you don't address my arguments that make this statement of yours irrelevant.

    8. China projected to have 40,000 screens in 10 years. IMAX is guiding for 600 screens in China = 1.5% penetration. Sounds a bit conservative doesn’t it?

    Depends. What's your source for 40,000 screens?

    9. CEO Gelfond has stated that all of the Dark Knight Rises will be filmed in IMAX. Director Christopher Nolan has publicly stated that he will film as much as possible in IMAX.

    Dark Knight Rises will not be shot entirely in IMAX. 2 friends of mine are camera operators. The difficulty of shooting with IMAX cameras greatly slows down production. Only sequences will be shot in IMAX.

    10. 3D is the fad. The glasses are a huge barrier. 3D TV sales = terrible. The Nintendo 3DS portable gaming system requires no glasses and still has been a tremendous disappointment. The reason? Little to no content that benefits from 3D. No benefit = no willingness to pay more per ticket. IMAX = premium brand.

    You've correctly stated why 3D is a fad. You state, without substantiation, why IMAX is a "premium brand". I provided reasons why audiences will tire of it. Why do you say they won't?

    11. HD TVs = the standard, sales = excellent. High definition image quality = a passion for great directors. The IMAX experience = unparalleled

    See #10.

    Nice try, but your facts are questionable at best, unsourced at worst, and you didn't address a single one of my arguments.
    Jun 15 06:24 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Find Stable Fixed Income With Preferred Stocks [View article]
    On Yahoo Finance, it's AHT-PD. But every broker has different symbols to trade under.
    Jun 15 04:06 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    Thank you for admitting that you cannot provide even one rebuttal.

    Nonsense, indeed.
    Jun 15 03:43 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    Then tell us why, or rebut the article point by point. Otherwise, it's an opinion without substantiation, and that doesn't help investors.
    Jun 15 02:52 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    Why?
    Jun 15 02:52 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    Meanwhile, you failed to address even a single point in my article. When you do that, then we can have a discussion.
    Jun 15 02:52 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    Yeah, I have. And if you clicked on the link in the article, you'd see that the film is only shooting sequences in IMAX.

    Meanwhile, you failed to address even a single point in my article. When you do that, then we can have a discussion.
    Jun 15 02:51 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    So let me get this straight. You insult me by saying my 1300 word article is a waste of your time....then ask me to comment on "there" [sic] earnings report. Why would I do that if my opinion is a "waste of time"?
    Jun 15 02:07 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IMAX: The Bull Case Doesn't Add Up [View article]
    That's the best you can do? Try addressing my points, each of them. If you can.
    Jun 15 01:27 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Forget MGM, Get a 190% Return on WYNN [View article]
    No, sir, it is the earnings growth.

    finance.yahoo.com/q/ae...
    Jun 14 10:07 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
418 Comments
190 Likes