Re: Kal Ho Na Ho

V wrote:
> "Raghu Jetley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> Follow what - can't this be the case ?
>>
>> Assume cost of running a movie in a theatre - X
>> No of seats in a theatre - Y
>> Revenue from every Z
>>
>> If movie is released in 1 theatre & it's house full then
>> profit =  (Y*Z) - X
>>
>> If released in 2 theatres & say it runs only 75% capacity in both.
>> then profit =  (1.5*Y*Z) - 2X
>>
>> For arbitrary values, X = 25 Y = 100 Z = 1
>>
>
> yes, but these values aren't exactly arbitrary. If you pick up X=1
> and Y=100 the profit would be much higher. However, if you pick up
> X=75, and Y=100 Z=1, lets look at those numbers again.
>
> Profit1  = 100 - 75 = 25
> Profit2 =  150 - 150 = 0.
>
> The movie with a lower per screen average ended up making no profit
> at all. Also, a movie with a higher per screen average provides you
> with a better percentage return on your investment.

My point is that - your original point that
"Everyone who intends to make money from a movie, specifically the
distributor and the theatre owner. Consider the cost of running a movie in
single theatre and you would follow the rest."
is not true all the time.

IMHO, it may not be true even in the vast majority of the times.
Many a times Naz8 in the Bay Area has a movie running in 2 of their own
theatres
in the same complex - they aren't stupid to this.