Vaping at the movies....

[chadsmo]

I just stealth vape at the movies.

 

[MrStik]

Before the bans, the movie houses were packed. Saturday matinees held all the brats while us parents ran errands, paying a teenager to keep an eye on them. Teens watching kids. Yep.
The blockbuster movies had lines 3 blocks long.
Halloween held special midnight scarey shows.
Popcorn, soda, candy, were expensive compared to elsewhere, but still affordable.
Since the bans? Empty theaters. No matinees. No Halloween specials. Snack bar so expensive, nobody much buys. Many have closed altogether.
They raised the prices of tickets and snacks, to pay for the movie rental, because not enough patrons to help with the cost anymore. Non smoking ANTZ get to pay for the missing smokers patronage. Now even they won't go. They think we smokers should pay that much, every day, for a pack of smokes, yet they won't she'll out that much once a week for a movie. They forced businesses to close, not us banned smokers now vapers.
Yes, there is a huge economical backlash.

The rising cost of movie tickets is a direct result in the cost of making a movie. Most of the blockbuster movies in the last 15 years was over 100million dollars. And a big chunk of those are in the 200million range. A very large chunk, almost all of it, of the ticket cost goes to the studio that forked the money out for these movies to be made. The 5 dollar Coke is the theater trying to pay the overhead on the huge multiplex they built that they have no hopes in filling.

Now here is a good question for you. If theaters were not getting filled due to smokers no longer going to movies, why have they built so many of these large multiplexes AFTER smoking was banned if they were not making any money?

The smoking ban may have had some impact on movie theaters, but it surely didn't empty them.

 

[KjAthena]

I vape using my VTR everywhere it is not prohibited...even our local movie theater, and yes I did ask and was told it is not prohibited...and no I do not blow clouds, I do know how to double inhale. Now if I was not a little grey haired grandma maybe someone would say something to me.

 

[otrpu]

When I vaped, I vaped in movie theaters. Sat in the balcony to the side of the projector light stream. We only go to matinee's. Usually very few people, and then, mostly teenagers. They were busy doing what teenagers do at movies and couldn't care less about what I was doing. Feb 6th was my last vape. I'm a quitter. JMHO

Cheers,
otrpu

 

[pmcode]

Before the bans, the movie houses were packed. - And they still are, which is why blockbuster movies are still pulling in record-breaking profits.
Saturday matinees held all the brats while us parents ran errands, paying a teenager to keep an eye on them. Teens watching kids. Yep. - Don't know about this one, haven't been to a Sat. matinee since my kids (ages) were in single digits.
The blockbuster movies had lines 3 blocks long. - Still do. Have you left the house lately? Mostly, though the real lines are on the midnight openings, those things get insane.
Halloween held special midnight scarey shows. - Still do, at least around here and down around LA
Popcorn, soda, candy, were expensive compared to elsewhere, but still affordable. - Still is affordable, that is always a personal decision, as to what one can afford or not.

* I have never worked "for" a theater, as in get paid, but I did organize a RHPS showing for about 6 weeks a year for 5 years running.

Since the bans? Empty theaters. No matinees. No Halloween specials. - Obvious fallacy.
Snack bar so expensive, nobody much buys. Many have closed altogether. - Obvious fallacy. Movie theaters would close altogether if they didn't have snack bars.
They raised the prices of tickets and snacks, to pay for the movie rental, because not enough patrons to help with the cost anymore. - Wrong. Prices will continue to rise, as high as the patrons allow them to go. Only by NOT going to the movies, will the studios/distributors get the message. NO real MOVIE THEATER IN THIS COUNTRY MAKES SQUAT ON THE TICKET PRICES. (I am not including the ridiculous $30 a pop "boutiques" in NYC) At least until the movie has been out for at least a month. This has been proven time and again. All of that money goes to pay for the "privilege" of allowing the theater the "opportunity" to show the blockbuster, first run movies. The studios and distributors set the prices, and the theater has to hope like hell they make enough to clear the rent on that film. And if the movie bombs, the theater DOESN'T GET REIMBURSED by the studio.

Quite honestly, the theater is the one getting the shaft on most of this. Whiny, .....y people complaining about every little thing bothering them, which is why it ends up getting banned, regardless of harm. The theater is just trying to make a buck. Just like any of us. And just like any of us, if you heard a stampede of people B&C'ing, and municipalities demanding things be banned, or you will lose your business license, you'd ban it too.

Do NOT mean this to come off as a rant, which, of course it does. It just reminds me too much of the following: http://irrelevant.org.il/may02-smilepop-soapbox4.swf

 

[Whitechapel]

At work, I kept hearing "oh you can smoke inside, so and so got the OK from ops!" I was like OK, badass. I asked ops and they yelled at me and called it inappropriate. And I'm a very passive person anyway, so I'll just stick to smoking in places where I used to smoke cigarettes.

 

[jwag1973]

I think a lot of vapors are probably guilty of sneaking a stealthy vape from time to time. My girlfriend would vape in a church and argue it's not smoke. For me personally, I try to be respectful and aware of my surroundings. Blatantly blowing clouds in a non-smoking environment is gonna get you negative attention. As well as the rest of the vaping community! If you can't refrain for an hour or two, be as discrete as possible.

 

[Uma]

The rising cost of movie tickets is a direct result in the cost of making a movie. Most of the blockbuster movies in the last 15 years was over 100million dollars. And a big chunk of those are in the 200million range. A very large chunk, almost all of it, of the ticket cost goes to the studio that forked the money out for these movies to be made. The 5 dollar Coke is the theater trying to pay the overhead on the huge multiplex they built that they have no hopes in filling.

Now here is a good question for you. If theaters were not getting filled due to smokers no longer going to movies, why have they built so many of these large multiplexes AFTER smoking was banned if they were not making any money?

The smoking ban may have had some impact on movie theaters, but it surely didn't empty them.

The larger towns did believe the ANTZ hype that if they banned them, they would come. Many of those large expensive wonderful new complexes folded, or are in the process of doing so. Just like the malls. Apparently all the patrons are in another city far far away. Oh yes, I see, obviously in pmcode's healthy, wealthy, ideological, town. (See post #85).

 

[Uma]

Before the bans, the movie houses were packed. - And they still are, which is why blockbuster movies are still pulling in record-breaking profits.
Saturday matinees held all the brats while us parents ran errands, paying a teenager to keep an eye on them. Teens watching kids. Yep. - Don't know about this one, haven't been to a Sat. matinee since my kids (ages) were in single digits.
The blockbuster movies had lines 3 blocks long. - Still do. Have you left the house lately? Mostly, though the real lines are on the midnight openings, those things get insane.
Halloween held special midnight scarey shows. - Still do, at least around here and down around LA
Popcorn, soda, candy, were expensive compared to elsewhere, but still affordable. - Still is affordable, that is always a personal decision, as to what one can afford or not.

* I have never worked "for" a theater, as in get paid, but I did organize a RHPS showing for about 6 weeks a year for 5 years running.

Since the bans? Empty theaters. No matinees. No Halloween specials. - Obvious fallacy.
Snack bar so expensive, nobody much buys. Many have closed altogether. - Obvious fallacy. Movie theaters would close altogether if they didn't have snack bars.
They raised the prices of tickets and snacks, to pay for the movie rental, because not enough patrons to help with the cost anymore. - Wrong. Prices will continue to rise, as high as the patrons allow them to go. Only by NOT going to the movies, will the studios/distributors get the message. NO real MOVIE THEATER IN THIS COUNTRY MAKES SQUAT ON THE TICKET PRICES. (I am not including the ridiculous $30 a pop "boutiques" in NYC) At least until the movie has been out for at least a month. This has been proven time and again. All of that money goes to pay for the "privilege" of allowing the theater the "opportunity" to show the blockbuster, first run movies. The studios and distributors set the prices, and the theater has to hope like hell they make enough to clear the rent on that film. And if the movie bombs, the theater DOESN'T GET REIMBURSED by the studio.

Quite honestly, the theater is the one getting the shaft on most of this. Whiny, .....y people complaining about every little thing bothering them, which is why it ends up getting banned, regardless of harm. The theater is just trying to make a buck. Just like any of us. And just like any of us, if you heard a stampede of people B&C'ing, and municipalities demanding things be banned, or you will lose your business license, you'd ban it too.

Do NOT mean this to come off as a rant, which, of course it does. It just reminds me too much of the following: http://irrelevant.org.il/may02-smilepop-soapbox4.swf

save it for the theater owners who are so convinced all those ANTZ are going to save them, they blame theiir loss of business on everything else. Digital technology, big screen tv's, home entertainment systems, high cost of babysitters, even pirating, and so on and so on. It doesn't take much effort to use Google, and confirm my stance. Yours on the other hand is more difficult to confirm. If you're speaking of your town, then great. If you're speaking of mine, you really need to chew your words before you swallow. Two new triplexes closed, ... And an older newer triplex equaling 3.. Actually, in my town alone. Other towns are experiencing similar economic setbacks. But your post was humorous, I must admit.

 

[Uma]

The larger towns did believe the ANTZ hype that if they banned them, they would come. Many of those large expensive wonderful new triplexes folded, or are in the process of doing so. Just like the malls. Apparently all the patrons are in another city far far away. Oh yes, I see, obviously in pmcode's healthy, wealthy, ideological, town. (See post #85).

Edited complex, meant to say triplex

Oops, hit quote instead of edit lol. Niters all, time for some beauty sleep.

 

[OhmTheWatt]

I've on more than one occasion gotten into altercations with people for ruining my movie experience. Whether it be talking the whole movie, having their cell on loud, putting their feet up on the chair next to me right by my face. If you can do it without putting a haze in the theater have at it. Just dont be all butthurt when someone grabs your vape stick and stomps it out.

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk

 

[Myrany]

What I fear is unfettered vaping- even with discretion, will lead to draconian regulations. We live in a 'progressive' society that is not ready for vaping, unless stated it is allowed. If I were in that situation, I would hold off from going to a movie, as I would flying.

I know addiction; I had a serious problem with alcohol years ago. If vaping ruled my life as bad as alcohol did, I'd go back to smoking. As it is, I grew out of my alcohol addiction (well, my wife, then friend, said she'd date me if I quit drinking) , as I believe many new vapers probably will grow out of their initial 24/7 vape habit. Being able to sit through a movie without a vape would be a good step.

I am 7 months in. I chain vape. If I am awake I am vaping. 0-1 mg juice. Your mistake is believing that everyone WANTS to "grow out of it". I have no intention of growing out of it. I enjoy the sensation of vaping. I enjoy the flavors. I am NOT smoking. At my nic level who cares if I chain vape.

Vaping in a theater? I just do not go to theaters. That simple. I have a good home theater. I can wait for a movie to hit pay per view and watch it with good food, my feet up, and a vape to hand.

 

[Jman8]

Before the bans, the movie houses were packed. - And they still are, which is why blockbuster movies are still pulling in record-breaking profits.

They aren't always packed. If it is opening weekend on hyped up movie, it'll be packed. If it's first month of hyped up blockbuster, that is actually good, it'll be packed. Just about everything else will not be packed. If it is movie that will go on to be nominated for Oscar, but not win, and it's in it's 4th week, on say a Tuesday, there's a good chance you could be the only person in the theater during the showing.

Circa 1980, the #1 grossing movie of that year was in about 1500 theaters. In 1990's, that would be around 2500 theaters. In 2010's, it is 4500 theaters. Hype something well enough and almost challenging to see how you aren't making $100 million in the opening month, regardless of how bad many might think it is. For example, 2013's "The Lone Ranger."

Snack bar so expensive, nobody much buys. Many have closed altogether. - Obvious fallacy. Movie theaters would close altogether if they didn't have snack bars.

Which is why many of the older movie houses have closed. Theaters bring in revenue from gross receipts of films they show, with lion share going to the studio. Thus in a theater's best interest, today, to have 15 theaters in one complex. Obviously, some will still choose theater concessions with that many films on site. Vast majority of theaters, that I'm aware of, are corporate brands spread across a region (i.e. southeastern US). The older type of movie houses that do still exist don't really rely on concession stands, though to some degree that is applicable, but on customer types that prefer that sort of viewing, and the type of films they tend to attract. IOW, they cater to niche market / loyal audience. Multiplexes cater to those who want to see the latest hyped up movie that is in 3D, action packed, and/or has the A-list actors.

NO real MOVIE THEATER IN THIS COUNTRY MAKES SQUAT ON THE TICKET PRICES. (I am not including the ridiculous $30 a pop "boutiques" in NYC) At least until the movie has been out for at least a month. This has been proven time and again. All of that money goes to pay for the "privilege" of allowing the theater the "opportunity" to show the blockbuster, first run movies. The studios and distributors set the prices, and the theater has to hope like hell they make enough to clear the rent on that film. And if the movie bombs, the theater DOESN'T GET REIMBURSED by the studio.

But not all blockbusters arrange for deal of 100% to the studio in first few weeks. Some for sure do, and is huge gamble for theater, but also huge gamble if they were to not show it. So, you show 15 films on the site and realize on say 5, the theater can get better deal on first couple weeks, and hopefully things work out. Again, hype a movie that is mediocre long enough and the theater will do alright on films that are touted as blockbusters on opening weekend, but by second week were considered flops by those in the know. And films that have zero chance of getting Oscar nomination.

Quite honestly, the theater is the one getting the shaft on most of this. Whiny, .....y people complaining about every little thing bothering them, which is why it ends up getting banned, regardless of harm. The theater is just trying to make a buck. Just like any of us. And just like any of us, if you heard a stampede of people B&C'ing, and municipalities demanding things be banned, or you will lose your business license, you'd ban it too.

It's actually a bit challenging to find items that are banned in theaters. Smoking obviously comes to mind, but show me an indoor place on this planet where it's not banned. Food from the outside is a common ban, which I'm thinking fellow patrons aren't going to tell on each other for trying and/or succeeding in getting around this one. In reality, this one ought to be number one if the point of "theaters rely on concession stands" is touted higher than what I conveyed above. Other than these items, along with weapons and alcohol, I'm not aware of what items are banned yet otherwise legal in society. I could see people having either a weapon or alcohol on them in a theater, and it really not being a huge deal unless person was flaunting it in highly disruptive way (read as violent).

So, it comes down to the idea that vaping is smoking in some people's eyes. Obviously, those who think this are incorrect. Those who know it is vapor / not smoking but poses some risk to others are the one's who seek a ban. And these people don't ever have to visit a theater to choose this path. Hype up vaping, and really second hand vapor, as harmful, to some degree, and it'll be because this perspective is allowed to go uncheck, that a ban would be plausible.

 

[jpargana]

That is just BS, plain and simple. Bans and severe vaper within 500 miles of each other and never in public, the zealots, FDA, Big Pharm and their lackeys in government were trying to ban vaping. The more that the public in general sees that vaping is not the same as smoking, by us doing so publicly but respectfully and being well prepared to educate people as to what vapor is and is not, the more the general public will perceive vaping in a positive light.

Are there always a few idiots in every locale who take it upon themselves to judge other's harmless behavior and interfere? - yes. Being concerned about and changing our respectful behavior because of the small, idiot extremist, is not the answer.

^^^^

This.

 

[EddardinWinter]

I've on more than one occasion gotten into altercations with people for ruining my movie experience. Whether it be talking the whole movie, having their cell on loud, putting their feet up on the chair next to me right by my face. If you can do it without putting a haze in the theater have at it. Just dont be all butthurt when someone grabs your vape stick and stomps it out.

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk

I should like to see that. I would actually respect that person. Most of the anti-vape crowd prefers to run to management and have a third party handle their sensitivity issues. Sorry to hear your abrasive nature and aggressive tendencies are getting you into trouble with members of your community. Perhaps if you asked nicely before attempting to "grab a vape stick and stomp it out." I don't know if I could knock you out or not, but if you grabbed and stomped my PV, we certainly would find out.

But I have yet to see a single person in this thread advocate "putting a haze" or "blowing clouds". Despite that, I see a phalanx of straw men being set up by those that prefer I not vape in the theater. Why is that?

I have a simple suggestion. Stop talking about that. Nobody on this thread has suggested such a thing. What we are discussing in theaters is stealth vaping. Stealth vaping is not blowing clouds, and you all know it.

 

[EddardinWinter]

From my blog on this very subject....

I would like to see and end to the practice of the continued citation of urban legend/myth of the ban-causing militant vaper. (aka BCMV)

I have repeatedly asked for documentation, pictures, video, etc. throughout this thread of this elusive creature. Many people who disdain public vaping are here taking the usual shots at the practice, and I respect that right to speak their minds and I respect their decisions. We all must make our own decision for ourselves of when to vape, and when not to. What I cannot stomach, is the repetition of this canard when there is zero documentation to substantiate this absurd fantasy. I interpret this myth creation of the BCMV as some sort of guilt/manipulation tactic with no basis in fact. I am not going to let it go unchallenged.

Someone prove me wrong, if you can...I am prepared to be proven wrong. It certainly won't be the first time!

The ban-causing militant vaper doesn't exist! The tooth fairy, the Unicorn, and the honest politician are the equivalent of the ban-causing militant vaper.

I read here on ECF many times a week about ban X because guy X was running around "blowing clouds of vapor in people's faces". I am not denying militant vapers exist. I am not denying bans happen. I challenge the causality between the two.

I am challenging the purveyors of this tale: give concrete evidence that a militant vapor X caused ban X. Continuing to represent that as a factual sequence of events (without citations) will be challenged by me every time I see it.

Expect it!

 

[EddardinWinter]

Jman8: You know there actually are businesses where children aren't welcome, don't you?

You don't think that might have had something to do with the paying customers not liking the presence of the kids... complaining to the management about it?

Which side are you arguing for again?

I cannot believe you missed his satire...and it was such a beautifully made point. Go and re-read his post and the one he responded to with it, and I bet you will get it, GM.

For a Statist, you are uncommonly well-read and clever. There is no way you will miss the point of it if you try to see it.

 

[Anjaffm]

Welcome, Eddard, and nice to see you!

 

[MrStik]

The larger towns did believe the ANTZ hype that if they banned them, they would come. Many of those large expensive wonderful new complexes folded, or are in the process of doing so. Just like the malls. Apparently all the patrons are in another city far far away. Oh yes, I see, obviously in pmcode's healthy, wealthy, ideological, town. (See post #85).

So you still believe that 20% of the population of the US can really shut down all these movie theaters? Now Malls are closing because of indoor smoking bans? How about the billions in revenue from Amazon? Yep, they have nothing to do with the decline of retail stores. I am sure online retail has less of an impact on malls than the smoking bans.

 

[generic mutant]

Maybe you'll be kind enough to clarify it for me then Edd?

Is it that there is no causal connection between the behaviour of rowdy children and their inattentive parents, and children not being welcome in certain places? Is it that such bans are actually the handiwork of a shadowy conspiracy of anti-child extremists, funded by an international Big Pharma contraceptives racket?