Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

MoviePass CEO: The Subscription Model Is the Future for Theaters

September 06, 2017
Staff

WRITER

MoviePass CEO Mitch Lowe joined Glenn on radio Wednesday to talk about his company’s subscription business model and why movie theaters should actually be excited about people seeing unlimited free movies. He explained why MoviePass was first designed for millennials, a generation accustomed to subscribing to everything.

“We realized that what we really needed to do is to reinvigorate, especially, millennials,” Lowe said. “They talk themselves out of going to the movies. … ‘I’ve already got Netflix or Hulu; I’ll just wait and see it then.’”

For one fee, people can use MoviePass to see as many movies as they want to each month, as long as they don’t go to more than one movie per day or see the same film twice. MoviePass recently dropped its price from $50 to just $10 per month.

Movie theaters benefit from people being in the theater and buying concessions, so they should welcome a subscription service that encourages people to come to the movies, Lowe asserted.

“I think the movie theater experience is just totally changing,” Glenn said. “I think the future is putting me into some sort of cocoon where I never, ever want to leave.” As an example, he cited local theaters that serve people food while you watch the movie.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

STU: You can give your critique on the script too. The coauthor of American Assassin. Tomorrow, he joins us. The beginning of this hour on tomorrow's program. But one of the things that I love about movies and I have a new appreciation of them and can go to much more of them because of it is called this ridiculous movie called MoviePass.

GLENN: I don't -- there's something wrong here.

STU: It's ridiculous. There's something wrong. It's too good. When it's too good to be true, it means it's too good.

GLENN: Right. Mitch Lowe is here. He's the CEO of MoviePass.com. And, Mitch, I personally may put you out of business because I see too many movies. So...

MITCH: Hey, that's what we want. We want to reinvigorate the movie theater going. So we would love to see that.

GLENN: Okay. Honestly, I'll bankrupt you. I see almost every movie made, and I love to go to the movies. It is a pastime with me and my family. But we see probably a minimum of four movies a month. And under your service, I pay $10, even in New York where the ticket is $16, and I can go see any movie I want and I can see as many movies as I want, as long as it's not the same one over and over again, right?

MITCH: That's right. It's one a day. It's one a day.

GLENN: So how is that working for you? I'm trying to figure out the business model. How does that work?

MITCH: So here's the thing: Yes, there are about 11 percent -- 36 million people in the US and Canada that go to a lot of films every month. They go to roughly 18 films a year on average, and they buy half of all the movie tickets. But there's 51 percent of the population that go to less than a movie a month, and that's who primarily join our service. So, yes, everybody like yourself who goes to lots of movies joins. They get huge value, and they tell everybody about it. But the majority of our subscribers are people who go to three to six films a year prior to joining MoviePass. When they join, they double the amount of films they go, so now they're going to six to 12 movies a year.

So the majority of our subscribers roughly go to one a month. And then there's a small group of people who end up going five, ten times a month. And it drives up the average a little bit.

GLENN: Okay. So it's 9.95 a month. It used to be $50 a month.

MITCH: Yeah. Thirty to $50.

GLENN: How -- what happened to where you could drop it down that low?

MITCH: Well, what we found -- you know, when we were 30 to $50, we were really just appealing to the people -- that 11 percent who go a lot already. And we got them to go more often. But essentially, it was a -- at first a price point that only appealed to a small group of the public.

GLENN: Yeah.

MITCH: And we realized that what we really needed to do was to reinvigorate especially millennials. Over the past five years, millennials have decreased their amount of times going to the theater by 20 percent. And the reason why is now they have all these other alternatives. In fact, they talk themselves to go out of the movies. They go, I don't know if it's good enough. I've already got Netflix or Hulu. I'll just wait and see it then.

And what we really -- these are people that grew up on subscription. And really, what are subscription services, it's insurance against a bad movie. Now we can go and experiment. And if they don't like it, they can walk out and trash it the next day to their friends.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: When you put this together -- because AMC doesn't like this.

MITCH: Yeah.

GLENN: But I think the movie theater experience is just totally changing. I think the future is making me -- putting me into some sort of a cocoon where I never ever want to leave. And that's what's happening -- at least here in Texas, that's what's happening to movie theaters. Where great food -- they'll deliver anything.

MITCH: Yeah.

GLENN: I'm guessing there's a few that would even deliver lap dances. I'm not sure. But they just never want you to leave. And I'm guessing, that's where they make their money. Not on the actual ticket.

MITCH: Yeah, that's right. Concessions are 80 percent margin. You know, when you buy that popcorn or soda, 80 percent. And when you buy a ticket, it's roughly 50 percent. So the theaters really want you in the theater.

And, by the way, when you join MoviePass, what happens, because you're not pulling out that 10-dollar bill to pay for a ticket, you spend more money on concessions, which is great for the theaters. And that's why AMC should love it.

GLENN: Why don't they?

MITCH: Well, you know, we had a two-year partnership with AMC. You know, we -- we both contributed to a blind data report that showed that we doubled people's frequency of going to the movies. Increased their consumption of concessions. And AMC, I believe, you know, came to the point where they said, "You know, we should just do this ourselves." And so I believe this is a little bit of sour grapes in seeing that kind of we beat them to the punch. And, you know, I know they will probably release their own subscription program soon.

STU: We're talking to Mitch Lowe of MoviePass.com.

Mitch, one of the criticisms I've seen from AMC and others is that you are preparing people to pay $10 a month for movies. And then when you go out of business in two years, everyone is going to think the old movie price is too high.

MITCH: Yeah. Well, you know, I was on the founding executive team at Netflix and the COO of Redbox, and that's exactly what Blockbuster said to Netflix and they said to consumers. Don't look at these little guys over here that are offering an innovative service. Keep paying us the high prices.

GLENN: Yea. Are you publicly traded now, Mitch? Is this publicly traded?

MITCH: We're 51 percent owned. The deal isn't closed yet. But shortly, we'll be majority owned by a public company. It's HMNY. Helios & Matheson. And they are -- the reason why we sold half the company to them, a little more than half, is they are a big data and analytics company. And what we want to build is this great experience around going to the movies. And we're building upon their foundation. Their technology. That will build a whole night at the movies experience.

GLENN: I'll tell you, I think this is why AMC is wrong on this.

I don't -- you know, AMC should do what AMC does well. And that is, give me a good movie experience. But I wouldn't want a subscription with AMC, because then I'm locked into just AMC. I mean, if you were a public --

MITCH: Exactly.

GLENN: This might be the kiss of death: I would invest in your company because I think what the future is, is companies that say, "I just do this one piece. And I do it really, really well."

MITCH: Yeah.

GLENN: And they just start linking pieces together, to make everybody's experience super easy.

MITCH: Yeah. You have to listen to consumers. And what typically happens to the dominant player is they lose touch with their consumers. And they spend more time trying to protect an old way of doing things, at the cost of offering, you know, new benefits to consumers. And that's -- that's exactly what, you know, startups can do, is where -- I absolutely love movies. I love them in every way. And, you know, I started with video stores 30 years ago. And I just love movies. And I know the artists -- the creative community makes movies for the that's right, for the big screen, the big sound. You know, laughing with other people around you. They don't make them for the mobile phone. And even though that's fun and a great opportunity, you know, it's really the theater --

GLENN: No, there's nothing better -- yeah, there's nothing better than the theater.

MITCH: Yeah.

STU: And, Mitch, it is a -- any theater you want to go to -- I think a lot of people would think, oh, well, I have to find one of these theaters. It's literally any theater -- you basically have what is a debit card almost.

MITCH: Yeah. It's -- it's over 90 percent of all the theaters.

So there are some theaters -- you know, some drive-ins and some places that only take cash that you can't use it.

GLENN: Can you still use it at AMC? Can you still use it at AMC?

MITCH: Absolutely. You can still use it at AMC.

STU: And I don't know, Mitch, if you do radio-based customer service, but I have not received my card yet. I've just been using the app. So we really need to work that out.

MITCH: Well, we absolutely underestimated demand. And we were not prepared for the amount of new subscribers we had. We're still catching up. You know, on those first couple days, we were the third most searched word on Google after Charlottesville and Korea. And we continued to get thousands and thousands of new subscribers every day. And we're catching up fast. But you'll get yours soon. And I apologize. Your first month does not start until you get your card. So even though we charged you in advance, the month doesn't begin until you get your card.

STU: That's awesome.

MITCH: And I'm extremely sorry and I apologize.

STU: We're rooting for you. This is really cool.

GLENN: We are. Mitch, thanks a lot. Mitch Lowe. He's the CEO of MoviePass.com. That's MoviePass.com. I will be a member by the end of the day.

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?

Americans expose Supreme Court’s flag ruling as a failed relic

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

In a nation where the Stars and Stripes symbolize the blood-soaked sacrifices of our heroes, President Trump's executive order to crack down on flag desecration amid violent protests has ignited fierce debate. But in a recent poll, Glenn asked the tough question: Can Trump protect the Flag without TRAMPLING free speech? Glenn asked, and you answered—thousands weighed in on this pressing clash between free speech and sacred symbols.

The results paint a picture of resounding distrust toward institutional leniency. A staggering 85% of respondents support banning the burning of American flags when it incites violence or disturbs the peace, a bold rejection of the chaos we've seen from George Floyd riots to pro-Palestinian torchings. Meanwhile, 90% insist that protections for burning other flags—like Pride or foreign banners—should not be treated the same as Old Glory under the First Amendment, exposing the hypocrisy in equating our nation's emblem with fleeting symbols. And 82% believe the Supreme Court's Texas v. Johnson ruling, shielding flag burning as "symbolic speech," should not stand without revision—can the official story survive such resounding doubt from everyday Americans weary of government inaction?

Your verdict sends a thunderous message: In this divided era, the flag demands defense against those who exploit freedoms to sow disorder, without trampling the liberties it represents. It's a catastrophic failure of the establishment to ignore this groundswell.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

Labor Day EXPOSED: The Marxist roots you weren’t told about

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

During your time off this holiday, remember the man who started it: Peter J. McGuire, a racist Marxist who co-founded America’s first socialist party.

Labor Day didn’t begin as a noble tribute to American workers. It began as a negotiation with ideological terrorists.

In the late 1800s, factory and mine conditions were brutal. Workers endured 12-to-15-hour days, often seven days a week, in filthy, dangerous environments. Wages were low, injuries went uncompensated, and benefits didn’t exist. Out of desperation, Americans turned to labor unions. Basic protections had to be fought for because none were guaranteed.

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

That era marked a seismic shift — much like today. The Industrial Revolution, like our current digital and political upheaval, left millions behind. And wherever people get left behind, Marxists see an opening.

A revolutionary wedge

This was Marxism’s moment.

Economic suffering created fertile ground for revolutionary agitation. Marxists, socialists, and anarchists stepped in to stoke class resentment. Their goal was to turn the downtrodden into a revolutionary class, tear down the existing system, and redistribute wealth by force.

Among the most influential agitators was Peter J. McGuire, a devout Irish Marxist from New York. In 1874, he co-founded the Social Democratic Workingmens Party of North America, the first Marxist political party in the United States. He was also a vice president of the American Federation of Labor, which would become the most powerful union in America.

McGuire’s mission wasn’t hidden. He wanted to transform the U.S. into a socialist nation through labor unions.

That mission soon found a useful symbol.

In the 1880s, labor leaders in Toronto invited McGuire to attend their annual labor festival. Inspired, he returned to New York and launched a similar parade on Sept. 5 — chosen because it fell halfway between Independence Day and Thanksgiving.

The first parade drew over 30,000 marchers who skipped work to hear speeches about eight-hour workdays and the alleged promise of Marxism. The parade caught on across the country.

Negotiating with radicals

By 1894, Labor Day had been adopted by 30 states. But the federal government had yet to make it a national holiday. A major strike changed everything.

In Pullman, Illinois, home of the Pullman railroad car company, tensions exploded. The economy tanked. George Pullman laid off hundreds of workers and slashed wages for those who remained — yet refused to lower the rent on company-owned homes.

That injustice opened the door for Marxist agitators to mobilize.

Sympathetic railroad workers joined the strike. Riots broke out. Hundreds of railcars were torched. Mail service was disrupted. The nation’s rail system ground to a halt.

President Grover Cleveland — under pressure in a midterm election year — panicked. He sent 12,000 federal troops to Chicago. Two strikers were killed in the resulting clashes.

With the crisis spiraling and Democrats desperate to avoid political fallout, Cleveland struck a deal. Within six days of breaking the strike, Congress rushed through legislation making Labor Day a federal holiday.

It was the first of many concessions Democrats would make to organized labor in exchange for political power.

What we really celebrated

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

Kean Collection / Staff | Getty Images

What we celebrated was a Canadian idea, brought to America by the founder of the American Socialist Party, endorsed by racially exclusionary unions, and made law by a president and Congress eager to save face.

It was the first of many bones thrown by the Democratic Party to union power brokers. And it marked the beginning of a long, costly compromise with ideologues who wanted to dismantle the American way of life — from the inside out.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.