![\"Paytm](\"https:\/\/www.thehindu.com\/theme\/images\/th-online\/1x1_spacer.png\" "\\"Paytm")
<\/picture><\/div>\nBooking movie tickets online has never been so expensive \u2014 the firms BookMyShow and Paytm charge upwards of seven to 16% of a ticket\u2019s price as \u201cinternet handling fees\u201d or other similarly worded additional charges. Fees on the cinema chains\u2019 own booking platforms are not any different either \u2014 a typical afternoon screening of Chandu Champion<\/i> on a weekday afternoon in Delhi, for instance, will bump up a \u20b9490 fare to \u20b9556.08.<\/p>\n
The question of convenience fees isn\u2019t why they are charged \u2014 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.\u00a0<\/p>\n
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.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
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.<\/p>\n
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 \u201cconducts its business with the highest standards of compliance with all laws across all our business practices and operations,\u201d and that it would cooperate with \u201cany enquiries\u201d from the authorities on such matters.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cInternet handling fees\u201d remain at the same level even when offered by multiplexes\u2019 own websites, even though both the main multiplex chains in India \u2014 PVR INOX and Cin\u00e9polis \u2014 have started delivering tickets purchased at cinemas digitally, something they don\u2019t charge an extra fee for.\u00a0<\/p>\n
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\u2019s movie ticketing business to bolster its \u201cgoing out\u201d vertical.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Mr. Gopal alleged in his antitrust complaint that when he tried to set up a movie ticketing service \u2014 BookMyShow said that this was not a serious attempt and that his site had been created shortly before his complaint \u2014 cinemas told him that the company had paid them lock-in fees to prevent them from signing distribution deal with potential competitors. While BookMyShow\u2019s response to this particular allegation was not clear due to redactions in the CCI\u2019s investigation order, it admitted that it shares a portion of the convenience fee with cinemas.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Bhoomika Agarwal, a researcher with the tech policy consultancy The Dialogue, warned that \u201cit would not be correct to say that high handling fees and a small number of players always indicate there is collusion or exclusive arrangements,\u201d something that \u201ccan be conclusively established only after the CCI decides the case\u201d. 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.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The draft Digital Competition Bill (DCB) may have some impact on the two online ticketing firms\u2019 prices, even if not immediately: \u201cThe DCB specifies Core Digital Services covered by the law, including \u2018Online intermediation services.\u2019 This definition encompasses digital services that handle electronic records or provide related services, broad enough to include ticketing platforms,\u201d Ms. Agarwal said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
While movie ticketing firms may not be eligible as \u201csystematically significant\u201d to attract scrutiny under the Bill purely because of their small size, Ms. Agarwal said they may fall under that category due to \u201cqualitative criteria\u201d. The Bill has seen severe pushback from large tech platforms, and has not yet been finalised.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n