I see your point, and in one sense I agree with you. This follows the theater industry’s business model. You’re not actually buying a ticket to see a movie, you’re renting a seat in theater where a movie is being played. By this standard, if you get your seat, you’ve gotten what you’ve exchanged for.
What I’m saying though, is that this business model doesn’t match the paradigm that the consumer expects when he wants to see a movie. If I pay for a service, I expect it to meet my expectations. Normally in our society, we exchange for something (a product or service) based on our valuation of it – We want gas in our car more than the $25.00 we have. If we don’t value the gas more than the $25.00, we won’t buy it.
When we watch a movie preview, we have a certain expectation about the movie - That it will be enjoyable, or that we will find that the movie was indeed more valuable than the $9 we spent on it. But that’s not the case. We don’t get to make the decision about how valuable the movie was to us, because we have to pay before we get the product. If someone buys a blender with the impression it would crush ice, and it won’t even cut bananas, they’re likely going to want to return it and get back their money. Likewise, the movie did not provide what the preview suggested. This is why you’re renting a seat, rather than paying to watch a movie…
I would love it if the industry changed - to something of a “pay what you think it was worth”, but I think people are too focused on getting and keeping money to pay for what they value when they can lie and not pay… sadly.
</essay>