How much does it cost a theater to install Rear Window?
"The cost of installing the Rear Window Captioning system varies from theater to theater based on factors such as theater size and existing equipment. The number and style of reflectors that a theater chooses to purchase also will affect the overall cost. The basic cost of the LED datawall is estimated at approximately $4,000 for conventional theaters and $8,000 for large specialty theaters (IMAX®). The cost per reflector is approximately $80; theaters that have installed the system have initially purchased 12 reflectors at $50 apiece. The DTS 6D player, which many theaters already have available, costs $6,000 if purchased separately. Installation costs depend on the theater's maintenance arrangements; arrangements for installation can be made with the equipment supplier."
 
So, it appears, that an RWC system can be installed in a conventional theater for the relatively cheap price of $4600 (if they already have a DTS 6D player) or $10,600 if they have to purchase the DTS 6D player.  That is using the standard applied above, of a theater purchasing 12 reflectors.  This was published in June of 2003, people, 5 1/2 years ago.  How much have the prices dropped since then?  I am aware, that there is also a one time licensing fee, which I understand to be $2000 (approximately) as well.  All told, still a heck of a lot cheaper than the published estimates of $100,000 per screen of converting to full on digital (which industry publications have indicated will take approximately 3 and 1/2 years to complete, if conversion begins in 2009 as expected).  Prices like this make it VERY hard for me to believe that a break even point is hard for movies to attain when they purchase caption equipment.

Also, as the poster whom I addressed in my last piece says (mistakenly and misleadingly, I believe), the new digital conversion will be incompatible with these existing systems.  However, I found another article in which an industry spokesman with knowledge of the conversion specifications states that these systems (RWC and Open Caption/DTS-CSS) will be rendered obsolete and not needed once the conversion takes place.  Now, I have to say, that is the ONLY statement I have seen published so far that goes that far and says something this strongly.  It was from an old article somewhere in California, and a lot could have changed since that time, and the original poster COULD be correct.

Additionally, I would like to address another point in that piece, that I failed to address before.  Namely, that not all studios release captioned movies (I believe the poster stated "Most independent studios do not caption their releases").  Just for the sake of research, I went to the Regal Cinemas website and reviewed all available movies currently playing that were advertised on their site as showing in either RWC, DA, or Open Caption.  My research shows that out of a total of 13 different movies they advertise as being captioned in one form or another, 6 of them are from companies that were NOT in the Top 5 (by revenue) movie studios of 2007, and at least 3 of those are considered independents, or "mid-major" studios (Lionsgate, MGM/United Artists, and Summit Entertainment).  I also discovered that quite a few of these "independents" are sometimes actually operating under the umbrella of major studios.  I have yet to find a release that shows what the top studios are BY NUMBER OF FILMS RELEASED (a point of contention by the poster), but will keep digging, because I truly believe the majority of films released now are captioned.

One last point.  Since I was already on the Regal website, I decided to take a close look at their advertised show times and dates for the Lexington, Ky. location (the only Regal Cinema in Kentucky), and the Cincinnati, Ohio areas (next closest one to Lexington).  I wasn't too surprised, and the results actually confirmed the biggest complaint of the deaf community (inconvenient showtimes/dates) and dismissed the poster's statement that they lose 75% of business for a showing of a captioned movie versus a non-captioned movie.  The showtimes and dates were:

As you can see, there is one more showing in Lexington this week of a captioned movie, and it takes place at 4:30 in the afternoon TODAY (a Thursday during a school week).  To be fair to that location, since it is so late in the week, they had already shown some caption movies this week, including a couple that were during prime time hours, but all the others were at times such at 1:15 in the afternoon during the week, etc.  Also, even though the Mason location (in Ohio, very close to Cincinnati) has advertised their showtimes ALREADY for NEXT WEEK, the Lexington location simply has TBD (To Be Determined).  The Mason location is a great example of one thing:  the power of advertising IN ADVANCE, even if 5 of the 14 total showings are at very poor hours during the week, when many people are either working or in school.  I'm sure such poor planning EVERYWHERE leads to very bad attendance that can completely skew attendance totals to look bad.  But at least they are announced well in advance, and people can plan if there are limited showings of a movie they really want to see.  They also, at the Mason location, partner with the Hearing, Speech, and Deaf Center in Cincinnati to ensure that this schedule is sent out on an email blast weekly, I know, because I receive the email every week without fail, I choose to receive this email because I want to know what is going on, even though driving up there is a 4 hour trip ONE WAY for me if I chose to go.  That's the kind of partnership by local management with local deaf and hard of hearing chapters and advocates that can lead to successful movie attendance, that I have been trying to preach.

But showtimes/dates like these make my argument for me.  How many HEARING people are going to attend movie showings at 12:00 noon or 1:15 p.m. during a workday?  To argue that there is little demand based on attendance figures with showtimes like these, is a losing argument by the theaters, and an INSIPID argument.

Eddie