Paytm and BookMyShow are the only firms who operate online movie ticketing services in partnership with multiplex chains and single screens. File.
| Photo Credit: Reuters
Booking movie tickets online has never been so expensive — the firms BookMyShow and Paytm charge upwards of seven to 16% of a ticket’s price as “internet handling fees” or other similarly worded additional charges. Fees on the cinema chains’ own booking platforms are not any different either — a typical afternoon screening of Chandu Champion on a weekday afternoon in Delhi, for instance, will bump up a ₹490 fare to ₹556.08.
The question of convenience fees isn’t why they are charged — booking sites and intermediaries across industries typically charge what consumers are willing to pay, even if the fee is higher than what it actually costs to provide a service, making profits and growing their businesses, as does any enterprise seeking profits. What is curious, though, is that this particular industry does not require massive investments in, say, delivery agents, like with the app-based food delivery industry or quick commerce firms, who have to pay individual delivery agents and maintain dark stores from which products are dispatched.
In the realm of movie ticketing, therefore, excessive convenience fees have created a peculiar phenomenon: a virtual duopoly devoid of physical activity justifying high costs, with no outside competition able or willing to enter the market. Electronic booking technology, despite the proliferation of cost-effective cloud and hosting solutions, has remained largely stagnant, lacking meaningful innovation (sparing ticket cancellation, which partially reimburses moviegoers who change their plans). This anomaly stands out in an era characterized by declining infrastructure costs.
Paytm and BookMyShow are the only firms who operate online movie ticketing services in partnership with multiplex chains and single screens. At least one person who has tried to enter this space and offer lower costs has been turned away by the exhibition industry: Hyderabad-based advocate Vijay Gopal told the Competition Commission of India in 2022 that BookMyShow had exclusive partnerships that forced high convenience prices on consumers and locked potential competitors out of the market. BookMyShow did not deny exclusivity agreements in response to the CCI, and the commission ordered an investigation by its Director General. Two years on, no further development in that case has been forthcoming.
A spokesperson for BookMyShow declined to answer specific queries on whether the firm has arrangements with exhibitors that lock out potential competitors, but said in a statement that it “conducts its business with the highest standards of compliance with all laws across all our business practices and operations,” and that it would cooperate with “any enquiries” from the authorities on such matters.
“Internet handling fees” remain at the same level even when offered by multiplexes’ own websites, even though both the main multiplex chains in India — PVR INOX and Cinépolis — have started delivering tickets purchased at cinemas digitally, something they don’t charge an extra fee for.
Paytm did not respond to queries on its ticketing business. Zomato Ltd. disclosed in a filing in June that it was in talks to acquire the payments firm’s movie ticketing business to bolster its “going out” vertical.
Mr. Gopal alleged in his antitrust complaint that when he tried to set up a movie ticketing service — BookMyShow said that this was not a serious attempt and that his site had been created shortly before his complaint — cinemas told him that the company had paid them lock-in fees to prevent them from signing distribution deal with potential competitors. While BookMyShow’s response to this particular allegation was not clear due to redactions in the CCI’s investigation order, it admitted that it shares a portion of the convenience fee with cinemas.
Bhoomika Agarwal, a researcher with the tech policy consultancy The Dialogue, warned that “it would not be correct to say that high handling fees and a small number of players always indicate there is collusion or exclusive arrangements,” something that “can be conclusively established only after the CCI decides the case”. One executive in a different ticketing industry speculated that since the multiplex industry is hugely consolidated, these firms are able to seek better financial terms from ticketing intermediaries, which pass the cost on to consumers. Another result of this situation is a higher barrier for new entrants in the space, who must catch up to these financially prohibitive arrangements from scratch.
The draft Digital Competition Bill (DCB) may have some impact on the two online ticketing firms’ prices, even if not immediately: “The DCB specifies Core Digital Services covered by the law, including ‘Online intermediation services.’ This definition encompasses digital services that handle electronic records or provide related services, broad enough to include ticketing platforms,” Ms. Agarwal said.
While movie ticketing firms may not be eligible as “systematically significant” to attract scrutiny under the Bill purely because of their small size, Ms. Agarwal said they may fall under that category due to “qualitative criteria”. The Bill has seen severe pushback from large tech platforms, and has not yet been finalised.
