AMC 電影院 (AMC) 2015 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Greetings and welcome to the AMC Entertainment fourth-quarter 2015 conference call.

各位好，歡迎參加 AMC Entertainment 2015 年第四季財報電話會議。

(Operator instructions)

（接線員指示）

As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to your host, John Merriwether, Vice President of Investor relations. Thank you Mr. Meriwether, you may begin.

提醒各位，本次會議將被錄音。現在我想把會議交給本次主持人、投資人關係副總裁 John Merriwether。謝謝您，Meriwether 先生，您可以開始了。

Thank you, Rob and good morning, everyone. I'd like to welcome you to AMC's fourth-quarter and full-year 2015 earnings conference call. Before we get started with our prepared remarks, I'd like to remind everyone that as referenced in our press release issued earlier this morning, we have posted a CFO commentary on the Investor Relations page of our website at www.AMCTheatres.com.

謝謝你，Rob，各位早安。歡迎各位參加 AMC 2015 年第四季及全年財報電話會議。在我們開始宣讀事先準備的講稿之前，我想提醒各位，如同我們今天稍早發布的新聞稿所提及，我們已在 www.AMCTheatres.com 網站的投資人關係頁面上張貼了一份 CFO 評論稿。

I'd also like to remind you that some of the comments made by management during this conference call may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 as amended and section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions and are discussed in our public filings, including our most recent 10-K. Statements made throughout this presentation are based on current estimates of future events, and the Company has no obligation to update or correct these estimates. Listeners are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks and uncertainty and that actual results may differ materially as a result of these various factors.

我也想提醒各位，管理層在本次電話會議中所發表的部分評論，可能包含《1933 年證券法》（修訂版）第 27A 條及《1934 年證券交易法》（修訂版）第 21E 條所定義的前瞻性陳述。前瞻性陳述受風險、不確定性與假設影響，並已在我們的公開申報文件中討論，包括我們最新的 10-K。整份簡報中的陳述係基於對未來事件的目前估計，公司沒有義務更新或更正這些估計。提醒聽眾，任何此類前瞻性陳述並非對未來績效的保證，且涉及風險與不確定性；由於上述各項因素，實際結果可能出現重大差異。

In addition, comments made on this call may refer to certain measures such as EBITDA, adjusted EBITDA, adjusted EBITDA margin, free cash flow and adjusted diluted earnings per share, which are not in accordance with GAAP. However, management believes these results more clearly reflect operating performance. For a full reconciliation of EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA to GAAP results in accordance with regulation G, please see our press release issued earlier today as furnished as an exhibit to our form 8-K dated February 29, 2016, which is located in the Investor Relations area of our website.

此外，本次電話會議中的評論可能會提及某些非依 GAAP 編製的衡量指標，例如 EBITDA、調整後 EBITDA、調整後 EBITDA 利潤率、自由現金流，以及調整後稀釋每股盈餘。然而，管理層認為這些結果能更清楚反映營運表現。若要依據 Regulation G 取得 EBITDA 與調整後 EBITDA 與 GAAP 結果之完整調節表，請參閱我們今日稍早發布的新聞稿；該新聞稿已作為 2016 年 2 月 29 日之 8-K 表格的附件提供，並可在我們網站的投資人關係專區查閱。

After our prepared remarks, there will be a brief question-and-answer session. Joining me on the call today are Adam Aron, CEO and President; and Craig Ramsey, Chief Financial Officer. I will now turn the call over to Adam.

在我們宣讀事先準備的講稿後，將有一段簡短的問答時間。今天與我一同參與電話會議的有：執行長兼總裁 Adam Aron，以及財務長 Craig Ramsey。現在我把電話交給 Adam。

Thank you, John. Good morning everyone and thank you for joining us. I'd like to begin with a brief overview of our record-setting fourth quarter and our record-setting full-year 2015 financial results and highlight some of our key accomplishments. I'd also like to review with you my first 60 days as CEO of AMC and update you on the key priorities I've already outlined to further increase value for our guests, our associates, and of particular importance, our shareholders.

謝謝你，John。各位早安，感謝各位加入。我想先簡要概述我們創紀錄的第四季與創紀錄的 2015 全年財務成果，並重點說明一些關鍵成就。我也想與各位回顧我擔任 AMC 執行長的前 60 天，並向各位更新我已提出的關鍵優先事項，以進一步提升我們對顧客、同仁，以及尤其重要的股東所創造的價值。

Before I do though, we could not possibly begin this call without mentioning that we are on the call from Dallas, Texas at our annual conference of all of our movie theater general managers. But just a few short hours ago and one brutal mid-continental redeye flight ago, I was in Los Angeles attending the Academy Awards. There, I had the privilege of watching firsthand that a movie made by Open Road Films, Spotlight, won two Oscars -- one for Best Original screenplay, and one, the granddaddy of them all, the much coveted Best Picture of the Year.

不過在開始之前，我們不能不先提到：我們目前是在德州達拉斯，於一年一度、所有影城總經理齊聚的年會現場進行這通電話會議。但就在幾個小時前、以及搭乘一趟艱辛的美國中部紅眼航班之前，我還在洛杉磯出席奧斯卡金像獎。在那裡，我有幸親眼見證由 Open Road Films 製作的《驚爆焦點》（Spotlight）拿下兩座奧斯卡——最佳原創劇本，以及最重量級、最令人垂涎的年度最佳影片。

Most of you may know that AMC owns 50% of Open Road Films, and on behalf of AMC, I now serve as Open Roads co-chairman. This is a very proud day for AMC and Open Road.

各位多半知道，AMC 持有 Open Road Films 50% 的股權，而我現在也代表 AMC 擔任 Open Road 的共同主席。對 AMC 與 Open Road 而言，今天是非常值得驕傲的一天。

We are thrilled for our colleagues at Open Road Films. This success with Spotlight gives us a pedigree which we would expect would improve the financial success of Open Road going forward. It certainly increases the value of its film library.

我們為 Open Road Films 的同仁感到振奮。《驚爆焦點》的成功為我們帶來一項資歷與口碑，我們預期這將在未來提升 Open Road 的財務表現；同時也確實提高了其影片片庫的價值。

Moving back to AMC, earlier this morning, in conjunction with our 2015 earnings press release, we issued Craig Ramsey a CFO commentary, which provides a detailed review of our financial results for the quarter and the year. Craig is with me on the call this morning, and after my formal remarks, we will open up the call for both of us to take your questions.

回到 AMC，今天稍早，配合我們發布 2015 年財報新聞稿，我們也發布了由 Craig Ramsey 撰寫的 CFO 評論稿，對本季與全年財務結果提供更詳細的檢視。Craig 今天早上也與我一同在線上；在我正式發言結束後，我們將開放由我們兩位一起回答各位的提問。

Incidentally, speaking of Craig, he would tell you, as I am now, that we have established an instant friendship and a superb working relationship. Accordingly, you should definitely expect real management stability at AMC. We have a truly knowledgeable and proven executive team in place.

順帶一提，談到 Craig，他會告訴你——我現在也同樣這麼說——我們立刻建立了友誼與極佳的合作關係。因此，各位絕對可以期待 AMC 的管理層將維持高度穩定。我們擁有一支真正專業且經過驗證的管理團隊。

So let's get started on the quarter and the year. 2015 was an impressive year for AMC as we set all-time highs across a broad array of full-year financial metrics -- records in every single revenue segment. Record adjusted EBITDA, record average ticket price, record food and beverage per patron sales, and important, above all else, record gross profit indicators and record free cash flow.

那麼我們就從本季與全年開始。2015 年對 AMC 而言是令人印象深刻的一年，我們在多項全年財務指標上創下歷史新高——每一個營收分部都創紀錄。調整後 EBITDA 創新高、平均票價創新高、每位來客的餐飲銷售創新高；更重要的是，最關鍵的毛利指標與自由現金流也創新高。

We finished 2015 with another strong fourth-quarter effort as both revenues and adjusted EBITDA grew meaningfully compared to last year -- again to record highs for a fourth quarter for AMC. Total revenues increasing 10.1% to $784 million and adjusted EBITDA growing 10% to $154 million. The growth in adjusted EBITDA was even greater, more than 14% when we exclude the nonrecurring $5.1 million California tax refund benefit that AMC recognized in the fourth quarter of 2014.

2015 年第四季我們再度交出強勁成績，營收與調整後 EBITDA 相較去年皆顯著成長——同樣創下 AMC 第四季的歷史新高。總營收成長 10.1% 至 7.84 億美元，調整後 EBITDA 成長 10% 至 1.54 億美元。若排除 AMC 在 2014 年第四季認列的一次性 510 萬美元加州退稅利益，調整後 EBITDA 的成長幅度更大，超過 14%。

These operating results translate into $41.6 million of net earnings and $0.42 of diluted earnings per share, both representing fourth-quarter growth of 40% compared to the same quarter a year ago. After adjusting net earnings and diluted earnings per share for financing costs incurred during the fourth quarter of 2015 and that $5.1 million aforementioned California tax refund benefit in 2014, adjusted diluted EPS grew more than 59% year over year to $0.43 per diluted share.

這些營運成果轉化為 4,160 萬美元的淨利，以及 0.42 美元的稀釋每股盈餘，兩者相較一年前同季皆成長 40%。在將 2015 年第四季發生的融資成本，以及 2014 年前述 510 萬美元加州退稅利益納入調整後，調整後稀釋 EPS 年增超過 59%，達到每股稀釋 0.43 美元。

As strong as these year-over-year results are, as you and as we analyze industry-wide results, competitively, our results would have been stronger still but for three issues. First, AMC introduced a tax on top strategy back in 2014, meaning that we added admissions or sales taxes on top of listed retail movie tickets and concession prices.

儘管這些年對年結果相當強勁，但當你我分析全產業的表現、從競爭角度來看，我們的結果原本還可以更強，若不是受到三個因素影響。第一，AMC 早在 2014 年就採行「稅金外加」策略，也就是在標示的電影票與販賣部零售價格之上，另外加計入場稅或銷售稅。

Many of our competitors copied our lead much later on, doing so only in 2015. So, a price increase that we realized in 2014, they realized for the first time instead in 2015, affecting year-over-year comparability.

我們許多競爭對手在更晚之後才跟進，直到 2015 年才這麼做。因此，我們在 2014 年就實現的那次價格上調，他們卻是在 2015 年才首次實現，影響了年對年的可比性。

Second, as you know, the fourth quarter of 2015 was all about Star Wars, Star Wars, Star Wars. Knowing that it had an unprecedented winner on its hands, Disney licensed more than 4100 theater locations to show Star Wars in North America.

第二，如各位所知，2015 年第四季幾乎就是《星際大戰》、《星際大戰》、《星際大戰》。迪士尼知道自己手上握有一部前所未有的超級強片，因此在北美授權超過 4,100 家戲院據點放映《星際大戰》。

A typical really big movie opens in between 3000 to 3500 theaters instead. Therefore, our so-to-speak capacity share for Star Wars was down somewhere between 15% and 25%.

一般而言，一部真正的大片通常只會在 3,000 到 3,500 家戲院上映。因此，換句話說，我們在《星際大戰》上的「容量占比」大約下降了 15% 到 25%。

In that light, it's really quite impressive that our market share for Star Wars fell only 2%. Candidly, that's because where we had it licensed to our theaters, we just played the hell out of that movie. Many of our AMC theaters showed Star Wars continuously, 24 hours per day, literally, for days and days on end without stopping.

在這樣的背景下，我們在《星際大戰》的市占率只下滑 2%，其實相當令人印象深刻。坦白說，這是因為在我們取得授權的影城，我們把這部片放映到極致。許多 AMC 影城連續 24 小時不間斷放映《星際大戰》，真的一整天 24 小時，連續好幾天都不停。

And third, our new Starplex theaters acquired in mid-December in the fourth quarter operated substantially lower ticket prices which impacted overall year-over-year pricing comparisons for AMC overall. Even with these three caveats, we are extraordinarily pleased with our fourth-quarter results, and we're energized as we start off in 2016.

第三，我們在第四季的 12 月中旬新收購的 Starplex 影城，其票價水準顯著較低，影響了 AMC 整體年對年的票價比較。即便有這三點但書，我們仍對第四季結果感到格外滿意，並在邁入 2016 年之際充滿動能。

It's hard not to be optimistic as we delivered record results in metrics after metric after metric. Taking a look at all four quarters of 2015, for the full year of 2015, total AMC revenues increased 9.3% to a record $2.95 billion, and adjusted EBITDA grew 15.6% to a record $536.5 million.

在一項又一項指標上都創下紀錄的情況下，很難不感到樂觀。回顧 2015 年四個季度、就 2015 全年而言，AMC 總營收成長 9.3% 至創紀錄的 29.5 億美元，調整後 EBITDA 成長 15.6% 至創紀錄的 5.365 億美元。

We are especially proud that this storied growth was driven by our industry-leading -- I might add industry-leading by a country mile -- admissions revenue for Strain of $384,000 and equally impressive food and beverage per patron of $4.62. Again, industry-leading against the majors. These operating results yielded $103.9 million of net earnings and $1.06 of diluted earnings per share, representing growth of more than 62% and 61% respectively compared to the same period in 2014.

我們尤其自豪的是，這段令人稱道的成長是由我們業界領先——我還要補充一句，領先幅度遠遠甩開同業——的 Strain 入場收入所帶動，達到 384,000 美元；同樣令人印象深刻的是，每位顧客的餐飲消費為 4.62 美元。再次強調，與大型同業相比，這些都是業界領先。這些營運成果帶來 1.039 億美元的淨利，以及每股稀釋盈餘 1.06 美元，分別較 2014 年同期成長逾 62% 與 61%。

After adjusting net earnings and diluted earnings per share, again for those financing costs and gains incurred during 2015 and 2014 and the aforementioned $5.1 million California tax refund benefit in 2014, adjusted diluted EPS grew by more than 98% to $1.13 per diluted share. Importantly, free cash flow for the year ended December 31, 2015 increased approximately $51 million, up more than 72% to a total of $121.2 million, surpassing $100 million for the first time ever in AMC's company history.

在調整淨利與每股稀釋盈餘後——同樣地，剔除 2015 年與 2014 年期間發生的融資成本與收益，以及前述 2014 年 510 萬美元的加州退稅利益——調整後每股稀釋盈餘成長逾 98%，達到每股 1.13 美元。更重要的是，截至 2015 年 12 月 31 日止年度的自由現金流增加約 5,100 萬美元，成長逾 72%，總額達 1.212 億美元，為 AMC 公司史上首次突破 1 億美元。

There is no way to characterize these results by anything other than saying that these are strong results for AMC and they reflect the health of the movie industry as a whole. It's an industry that's generated three record years in industry box office out of the last four with a 2015 industry box office eclipsing the elusive $11 billion mark for the first time ever.

對於這些結果，除了說它們對 AMC 而言是強勁的成果之外，沒有其他更貼切的形容；同時也反映整體電影產業的健康狀況。這個產業在過去四年中有三年創下票房紀錄，而 2015 年的產業票房更是史上首次突破難以企及的 110 億美元門檻。

Our studio partners delivered more than ever before in 2015, as you know, with three titles achieving top 10 status for highest grossing domestic movies of all time, Avengers: Age of Ultron at number nine, Jurassic World at number four. And I'm sure you can guess number one, the highest grossing domestic film of all time in the history of moviemaking, Star Wars: The Force Awakens.

我們的片廠合作夥伴在 2015 年的表現比以往更出色，如你所知，有三部作品躋身史上北美票房最高前十名：《復仇者聯盟2：奧創紀元》排名第九、《侏羅紀世界》排名第四。而我相信你也猜得到第一名——影史北美票房最高的電影《星際大戰：原力覺醒》。

At AMC, we actually are more optimistic about the slate of movies coming out in 2016 than many other observers. Just look at the popularity of Deadpool, for example, which has now become the largest grossing film ever to open in the month of February.

在 AMC，我們其實對 2016 年即將上映的片單比許多其他觀察者更為樂觀。以《死侍》的人氣為例，它如今已成為史上在二月份開片票房最高的電影。

We believe the studios will offer more solid films in 2016, but of course, only time will tell for sure. Having said that, one of the beauties of the movie business is that we have terrific visibility right now into the slate of films coming out in 2017 and 2018. Industry box office projections for 2017 and 2018 are frothy and robust, and within that industry, AMC has quite a enviable market position.

我們相信片廠在 2016 年將推出更多扎實的影片，但當然，最終仍需時間驗證。話雖如此，電影產業的一大優點是：我們現在對 2017 年與 2018 年即將上映的片單具有極佳的能見度。產業對 2017 年與 2018 年的票房預測熱度高且強勁，而在這個產業中，AMC 擁有相當令人稱羨的市場地位。

AMC operated the top three grossing theaters in the US: number one, Empire 25 and number two, Lincoln Square, both in Manhattan, and number three, Burbank 16, which I toured yesterday incidentally in Los Angeles. Indeed, AMC with an 18.6% national box office market share operated fully six of the top ten grossing theaters in the United States. We're also number one or number two in box office revenues in 80% of the top 25 largest markets in the United States, including having the number one market share position in the top three US markets of New York, Los Angeles and Chicago.

AMC 經營美國票房最高的前三大影城：第一名是曼哈頓的 Empire 25，第二名是同在曼哈頓的 Lincoln Square，第三名是 Burbank 16——順帶一提，我昨天在洛杉磯剛參觀過。事實上，AMC 以 18.6% 的全國票房市占率，在美國票房最高的前十名影城中經營了多達六家。我們在美國前 25 大市場中，有 80% 的市場在票房收入上排名第一或第二，其中包括在美國前三大市場——紐約、洛杉磯與芝加哥——皆擁有第一的市占地位。

Now, reflecting back on my first 57 whole days here at AMC, my preconceptions about the Company which made me join it were true and are true. AMC is a strong company both financially and culturally. It's in a glamorous and created industry, and it's a truly fun place to work.

回顧我在 AMC 的前 57 個完整工作日，我加入公司前對它的既有印象是正確的，而且至今仍然如此。AMC 無論在財務面或企業文化面都是一家強健的公司。它身處一個光鮮且具創造力的產業，也是一個真正有趣的工作場所。

Importantly, for our guests and for our shareholders, the innovation, imagination and excellence heretofore in AMC's guest experience strategy has been immensely successful in producing the impressive financial results I've just described. But, make no mistake, ours is a company that does not want to rest on its laurels.

更重要的是，對我們的顧客與股東而言，AMC 迄今在顧客體驗策略上的創新、想像力與卓越表現，已極為成功地帶來我剛才所描述的亮眼財務成果。但請不要誤會，我們是一家不願躺在功勞簿上的公司。

As such, I would like to talk to you about seven key priorities on which, as a senior management team, we are now all agreed that we believe will drive short-term, medium-term and longer term positive results for AMC. These have the ability to grow our market share to differentiate us from competition, and ultimately to drive even better financial performance for AMC over time. These priorities will receive both my full attention and focus as well as those of our entire executive team.

因此，我想與各位談談七項關鍵優先事項；作為高階管理團隊，我們目前一致認為，這些事項將推動 AMC 在短期、中期與長期取得正向成果。它們有能力提升我們的市占率、使我們有別於競爭對手，並最終在時間推移下帶動 AMC 更佳的財務表現。這些優先事項將獲得我以及整個執行團隊的全力關注與投入。

Number one, we will continue to strengthen our bond with our current and future guests through world-class marketing. I must admit I'm a marketer at heart and know there is readily identifiable low-hanging fruit for AMC here.

第一，我們將透過世界級行銷，持續強化與現有及未來顧客之間的連結。我必須承認，我骨子裡是個行銷人，也知道 AMC 在這方面有許多一眼可見、唾手可得的機會。

As an example, many savvy industry veterans think that our AMC Stubs loyalty program, with its 2.5 million active member households, is already the best loyalty program among all movie theater chains. Of our 200 million tickets sold in 2015, fully 21%, more than 40 million, were tracking their AMC purchases for AMC Stubs credit. But when we look at other industries, more than 50% of their customers in other industries participate in their loyalty programs or loyalty schemes, as the British refer to them with such term.

例如，許多精明的產業資深人士認為，我們的 AMC Stubs 會員忠誠計畫擁有 250 萬個活躍會員家庭，已是所有連鎖影城中最好的忠誠計畫。在 2015 年我們售出的 2 億張電影票中，有足足 21%——超過 4,000 萬張——透過 AMC Stubs 記錄其在 AMC 的消費以累積點數/回饋。然而，觀察其他產業，其他產業有超過 50% 的顧客會參與其忠誠計畫或忠誠方案（英國人常用這個詞）。

We have already, as a result of this observation, 21%, greater than 50%, we have already wholly redesigned AMC Stubs to be rolled out nationally in the second half of 2015 after some testing and research to make sure we have it perfectly attuned. We have a goal of more than doubling the participation rates in AMC Stubs within 24 months of launch.

基於這項觀察——21% 相較於超過 50%——我們已徹底重新設計 AMC Stubs，並在完成一些測試與研究、確保調整到位後，於 2015 年下半年在全國推出。我們的目標是在上線後 24 個月內，讓 AMC Stubs 的參與率增加一倍以上。

Similarly, we believe that we can triple or even quadruple the size of our avid movie-goer database over the next 36 months. And then we will mine that data to market movies much stronger then we can with a smaller database in place today. The increment in doing so is inexpensive because it allows us to introduce highly targeted marketing to more and more people who are already inclined to be tempted to buy tickets to see movies at movie theaters in the United States.

同樣地，我們相信在未來 36 個月內，可以將我們的重度觀影者資料庫規模擴大到三倍，甚至四倍。接著，我們將挖掘這些數據，以比目前較小的資料庫更有力地行銷電影。這樣做的邊際成本很低，因為它讓我們能把高度精準的行銷，觸及越來越多本來就更可能被吸引、在美國影城購票看電影的人。

More on marketing, social media outreach by AMC will continue to grow. We are entirely making over our website in 2016, as we will do this year for our smartphone apps. We're increasing the number of theaters with consumer preferred reserved seating.

在行銷方面，AMC 的社群媒體觸及將持續成長。我們將在 2016 年全面改版網站，也會在今年對智慧型手機 App 進行同樣的改造。我們也正在增加提供消費者偏好之劃位座位（reserved seating）的影城數量。

All of these programs with a goal of driving increased business to AMC theaters. Our marketing department is also facilitating the increased convenience of being able to buy a ticket online ahead of time and bypassing the ticket counter entirely. This is an amenity that our guests are increasingly choosing.

所有這些計畫的目標，都是帶動 AMC 影城的來客與業務成長。我們的行銷部門也在推動更便利的購票方式：讓顧客可事先在線上購票，並完全略過售票櫃檯。這項便利服務正被我們的顧客愈來愈多地選擇使用。

Our fourth-quarter 2015 internet ticketing volume totaled approximately 14.5 million tickets purchased online, a 65% increase over the fourth quarter last year, representing a sizable 29% of our total AMC tickets being sold online. In Q4 of 2014, online tickets instead accounted for about 18% of our total tickets sold.

我們 2015 年第四季的網路售票量約為 1,450 萬張線上購票，較去年第四季成長 65%，相當於 AMC 總售票量中有可觀的 29% 來自線上銷售。2014 年第四季時，線上售票約占我們總售票量的 18%。

And importantly, our proprietary ticketing engine at www.AMCTheatres.com, our website, also continues to attract guests. AMC online sold 65% more online tickets in the fourth quarter 2015 compared to the same quarter last year. These internet ticketing numbers are growing in leaps and bounds, and we expect they will continue to grow markedly in 2016.

同樣重要的是，我們自有的售票引擎——也就是我們的網站 www.AMCTheatres.com——也持續吸引顧客。AMC 在 2015 年第四季的線上售票量，較去年同期多出 65%。這些網路售票數據正以跳躍式速度成長，我們預期 2016 年仍將顯著成長。

In describing all this marketing activity, we believe we can accomplish much of this added marketing activity without appreciably spending additional AMC marketing monies to do so. As studios already spend billions of dollars marketing their movies, by creating more targeted and efficient vehicles to reach avid movie fans, we expect studios will be keen to reach out to those in our loyalty program, to those in our database, and to those who use our website and smartphone apps out of their publicity and advertising monies.

在描述上述所有行銷活動時，我們相信在不顯著增加 AMC 行銷支出的情況下，就能完成其中相當大一部分的新增行銷工作。由於片廠本來就投入數十億美元行銷其電影，透過打造更精準且更有效率的管道來觸及重度影迷，我們預期片廠將樂於運用其宣傳與廣告預算，去觸及我們忠誠計畫的會員、我們資料庫中的用戶，以及使用我們網站與智慧型手機 App 的人。

Second priority, two: our commitment to creating spectacular movie-watching experiences in theaters will continue at pace. We are still seeing that reseating projects and food and beverage concessions upgrades continue to drive cash-on-cash unlevered returns exceeding 25%.

第二項優先事項：我們對打造震撼的影廳觀影體驗的承諾，將持續以既定速度推進。我們仍然看到，座椅汰換/重設專案以及餐飲販售升級，持續帶來超過 25% 的現金對現金、無槓桿報酬率。

As of December 31, 2015, AMC had 1119 screens across 93 theaters with plush power recliners in operation. And AMC's outperformance of the industry at these theaters continues, as attendance at these theaters grew 16.6% and admissions revenue grew 23.2%, outperforming the industry by approximately 1060 and 1210 basis points respectively. We will continue to aggressively pursue more and more reseating and concession enhancements at selected theaters in our system.

截至2015年12月31日，AMC在93家影城共營運1,119個配備豪華電動躺椅的銀幕。而AMC在這些影城的表現持續優於產業，這些影城的觀影人次成長16.6%，票房收入成長23.2%，分別較產業高出約1,060與1,210個基點。我們將持續在系統內選定影城積極推動更多座椅汰換與餐飲販售（concession）升級。

Also in the theater innovation front, AMC's IMAX and Dolby Cinema auditoriums simply offer the best, the absolute best in movie watching. They represent 3% of our total screens yet generate more than 9% of our total box office revenues, an index of triple. Therefore, consumers are clearly demonstrating that they're wild about the IMAX and Dolby Cinema experiences.

此外，在影城創新方面，AMC的IMAX與Dolby Cinema影廳確實提供最佳、絕對最佳的觀影體驗。它們僅占我們總銀幕數的3%，卻貢獻超過9%的總票房收入，指數達三倍。因此，消費者顯然正用行動證明，他們非常熱愛IMAX與Dolby Cinema的體驗。

Fortunately, for us, AMC has more IMAX and Dolby Cinema screens than does any other exhibitor worldwide, and we are in active dialogue with both companies about significantly growing the number of so-called PLF locations, premium large-format screens, at AMC within calendar year 2016 and beyond. We are now also fully engaged in developing a third PLF, private label in-house premium large-format brand to further augment and complement IMAX and Dolby Cinema. All three of these PLF executions will be a major area of growth for AMC in 2016 and the years ahead.

對我們而言幸運的是，AMC擁有的IMAX與Dolby Cinema銀幕數量多於全球任何其他放映商；我們也正與兩家公司積極對話，計畫在2016曆年及其後，大幅增加AMC所謂的PLF據點（premium large-format screens，高端巨幕格式銀幕）。我們目前也全力投入開發第三種PLF——自有品牌的內部高端巨幕格式品牌，以進一步強化並補足IMAX與Dolby Cinema。這三種PLF的落地執行，將成為AMC在2016年及未來數年的主要成長領域。

Three, AMC is committed to establishing a much better dialogue with major movie studios. Our program organization has excellent relationships already, but we're approaching studios at the highest levels to further enhance open communication, dialogue, cooperation and trust between AMC and the source of most of our movie content.

第三，AMC致力於與主要電影製片廠建立更好的對話。我們的節目（program）團隊本來就已擁有良好關係，但我們正從最高層級與片廠接觸，以進一步提升AMC與我們大部分電影內容來源之間的公開溝通、對話、合作與互信。

The better relationships we can have in a relationship business, the better off AMC surely will be. At the same time though, while we intend to strengthen our major studio relationships, we are also committed to increasing the showcasing of alternate programming including art films, faith-based projects, Asian films, Indian films, Hispanic language films and special events as distributed by Fathom Events, even sports programming.

在這個以關係為核心的產業中，我們能建立越好的關係，AMC就必然越有利。同時，雖然我們打算強化與主要片廠的關係，我們也致力於增加多元內容的放映，包括藝術電影、信仰題材作品、亞洲電影、印度電影、西語電影，以及由Fathom Events發行的特別活動，甚至體育節目。

Four, another important relationship to develop is the potential for increased cooperation with the cinemas operated by Wanda, our largest shareholder. During just my second week on the job, Craig and I flew to China to meet for an entire week with the Wanda leadership.

第四，另一項重要的關係發展，是與我們最大股東萬達所營運的影城，提升合作的可能性。我上任的第二週，Craig和我就飛往中國，與萬達領導團隊進行為期一整週的會談。

As the United States and China are the two largest movie markets in the world, we can only benefit from exchanging ideas on best practices and exploring more joint purchasing. As but one example of recent benefit, two distinguished, talented and smart individuals well-known to Wanda have agreed to join AMC's Board of Directors, namely Gary Locke, former governor of the state of Washington, former US Secretary of Commerce and a former US ambassador to China. Also, John Zeng, president of Wanda Cinema Line, both have added immediate value as new AMC directors.

由於美國與中國是全球兩大電影市場，我們透過交流最佳實務並探索更多聯合採購，只會受益。舉一個近期受益的例子：兩位萬達熟悉且備受肯定、才華洋溢且睿智的人士同意加入AMC董事會，分別是Gary Locke——華盛頓州前州長、前美國商務部長、前美國駐中國大使；以及John Zeng——萬達院線總裁。兩位新任AMC董事都立即帶來了價值。

Five, we are committed to creatively exploring, and if wise to do so, participating financially in the intriguing facets of technologic change that will surround the consumers' choices in the entire range of experiences surrounding movie watching. Lest anyone forget, it wasn't so long ago that Blockbuster might have invested in Netflix.

第五，我們致力於以創意方式探索，並在明智的情況下，對圍繞消費者在整體觀影相關體驗選擇之技術變革的迷人面向進行財務參與。別忘了，不久之前Blockbuster本來可能就會投資Netflix。

Six, the sixth priority on my list will be to focus on all of you, our shareholders on the broader investment community as a whole. I've said this before and you will hear me say it often again, I am a firm believer that management teams work for the owners of a business. And in our case, that means the shareholders of our company, many of whom are listening this morning.

第六，我清單上的第六項優先事項，是聚焦各位——我們的股東，以及更廣泛的整體投資社群。我以前說過，未來你們也會常常聽到我再說一次：我堅信管理團隊是為企業的所有者工作。而在我們的情況下，這就意味著為本公司的股東工作，其中許多人今天早上正在收聽。

You and the securities analysts who help you understand our performance and where we're headed are extremely important to AMC, and you're extremely important to me. As CEO, I intend to be visible and transparent with the investment community. I look forward to hearing your ideas for AMC as well as sharing with you mine.

你們，以及協助你們理解我們表現與未來走向的證券分析師，對AMC極其重要，對我也極其重要。身為CEO，我打算在投資社群面前保持能見度並維持透明。我也期待聽到你們對AMC的想法，同時與你們分享我的想法。

And finally, seven, we are going to grow this company through marketing and product activity surely, but also through acquisition. With the acquisition of the Starplex theaters in the recent rear-view mirror just two months ago at AMC, we believe that we understand regulatory review and how antitrust policy will be applied to the movie theater business.

最後，第七，我們當然會透過行銷與產品活動來成長公司，但也會透過併購來成長。就在兩個月前，AMC完成收購Starplex影城；我們相信自己已理解監管審查流程，以及反托拉斯政策將如何適用於電影放映業務。

Speaking of Starplex, that acquisition added about 10% to our theater count, and we did not need to add even one single employee in our corporate headquarters to facilitate that growth. We have built a platform that can absorb well a larger scale than at current, which means that acquisitions of smaller or regional circuits can be added to the world of AMC with great efficiency.

談到Starplex，該項收購使我們的影城數量增加約10%，而我們不需要在公司總部額外增加任何一名員工來支援這項成長。我們已建立一個平台，能夠良好吸收比目前更大的規模，這意味著收購較小或區域型院線可以非常有效率地納入AMC體系。

And given that AMC has demonstrated that it's been a forward-thinking and innovative exhibitor, we believe we can offer more varied, high-quality movie-going experiences to the movie going public. Our theater additions therefore will be pro-consumer and pro-shareholder. What's more, given the highly fragmented nature of today's theatrical exhibition industry, we think there are any number of potential transactions that can be accretive in the very first year and pass regulatory muster.

而且，鑑於AMC已證明自己是一家具有前瞻思維且勇於創新的放映商，我們相信能為大眾提供更多元、更高品質的觀影體驗。因此，我們新增影城將同時有利於消費者與股東。更重要的是，鑑於當今院線放映產業高度分散，我們認為存在許多潛在交易，能在第一年就具增益性（accretive），並且能通過監管審查。

Having said that, and this is pretty important, this will be the last time that I talk about our acquisition strategy. As a matter of new, clear policy, AMC does not now or in the future intend to comment on market rumors or speculative activity. Similarly, since we will not quantify acquisitions into our growth plans and projections until actual transactions are at hand, again, we will be silent on this front until we have something worthy of being said.

話雖如此，而且這點相當重要，這將是我最後一次談論我們的併購策略。作為一項新的明確政策，AMC目前以及未來都不打算評論市場傳聞或投機性活動。同樣地，由於在實際交易尚未確定之前，我們不會將併購量化納入成長計畫與預測，因此在我們有值得對外說明的內容之前，我們也將在此方面保持沉默。

As we sit here today, I simply cannot be commenting publicly on whether we will have M&A activity today are not until a year from day or maybe not until the year after that. But do know and do rely on this: at AMC, we will be out there prospecting aggressively. And the instant we know we have a good opportunity at hand, we will then let you know as soon as we possibly can thereafter.

就今天而言，我無法公開評論我們是否會在今天進行併購活動，或是一年後才會，甚至可能要到再下一年才會。但請了解並請依賴這一點：在AMC，我們會積極地外出尋找機會。一旦我們確定手上有一個好機會，我們就會在其後盡快通知各位。

For those of you who tracked my year at the helm of Starwood Hotels, just as I've done here this morning, I laid out clear commitments of activity in my earliest days in the leadership chair, and then showed laser-like focus to make concrete and rapid progress on each. Before I turn the call over to you for Q&A, let me conclude by promising that as AMC did in 2015 and as I did elsewhere in 2015, we will promise that we will continue to work as diligently as it is possible within the purview of management team to deliver meaningful results and to focus on the priorities that I've outlined this morning and others as they may arise to realize the potential that exists for AMC in calendar year 2016 and beyond.

對於各位曾追蹤我在Starwood Hotels掌舵那一年的人而言，就像我今天早上所做的，我在上任初期就提出清楚的行動承諾，並以雷射般的專注在每一項上取得具體且快速的進展。在我把電話會議交給各位進行問答之前，讓我以承諾作結：如同AMC在2015年所做、也如同我在其他地方於2015年所做，我們承諾將在管理團隊職責範圍內，以最大可能的勤勉持續努力，交付有意義的成果，並聚焦我今天早上所概述的優先事項，以及未來可能出現的其他事項，以實現AMC在2016曆年及其後所存在的潛力。

Thank you for listening. We realize it's a long commentary, but this is my first real quarterly call, and I wanted to share with you where AMC is headed. We will now turn the call over to you to take your questions.

感謝各位收聽。我們知道這段說明很長，但這是我第一次真正的季度電話會議，我希望與各位分享AMC將往哪裡走。現在我們將把電話會議交給各位，開始提問。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Operator Instructions)

（接線員指示）

Eric Handler, MKM Partners.

Eric Handler，MKM Partners。

Thanks, a lot.

非常感謝。

Craig, is there a way to figure out what a normalized admissions revenue per screen you had after adjusting for Starplex and all those other items, and how your core business compared relative to the industry? And secondly, when you look at your non-reseated theaters, the core so to speak, how are those theaters performing, and what are you doing there, specifically, to ensure that with all of the other reseating going on throughout the industry that their market share is hopefully stable?

Craig，有沒有辦法在調整Starplex以及其他所有項目之後，算出每銀幕的常態化票房收入（admissions revenue per screen），並比較你們核心業務相對於產業的表現？第二，當你看你們那些尚未換裝座椅的影城——也就是所謂的核心——這些影城的表現如何？在整個產業都在進行座椅升級的情況下，你們具體在那些影城做了什麼，以確保它們的市占率希望能保持穩定？

Okay.

好的。

Well, normalized admissions revenue per screen I think was your first question. And unfortunately, there's not an easy, quick answer because we had -- we saw some things on pricing that Adam alluded to in his commentary that mitigated some of our pricing versus what others achieved in the quarter, whether that the tax on top that we anniversaried in the early part of the quarter, so we did not benefit from that.

嗯，你第一個問題我想是每銀幕的常態化票房收入。不幸的是，這沒有一個簡單、快速的答案，因為我們確實——我們在定價上看到一些情況，正如Adam在他的說明中提到的，那些因素在某種程度上抵消了我們的定價表現，相較於其他公司在本季所達成的結果；例如本季初我們進入了某項附加稅（tax on top）的周年比較期，因此我們沒有從中受益。

We also had the impact of Starplex, which, their average ticket price for Starplex was just above five bucks. We're operating closer to $9. So even though it was only a couple weeks, those were two pretty big weeks that had a pretty dramatic impact on our business.

我們也受到 Starplex 的影響；Starplex 的平均票價僅略高於 5 美元，而我們的營運票價更接近 9 美元。因此，即使只有幾週，那也是兩個相當重要的週期，對我們的業務造成了相當顯著的影響。

We were, however, successful in driving a lot of attendance, and on both a total basis and on a screen basis. But Adam alluded to our admissions revenue per screen of about $384,000 per year. I was going to look and see; in the quarter it was about $398,000.

不過，我們成功帶動了大量的觀影人次，無論以總量或以每銀幕為基礎來看都是如此。但 Adam 提到我們每銀幕每年的入場收入約為 384,000 美元。我原本要查一下；就該季度而言約為 398,000 美元。

Obviously, Star Wars had a pretty dramatic impact on the upside but, I don't know if that's helpful to give you the range. For the full year, it was about $386,000, and for the fourth quarter it popped up to just under $400,000. That's in a normalized range.

顯然，《星際大戰》對上行有相當戲劇性的影響，但我不確定這樣提供區間是否有幫助。全年約為 386,000 美元，而第四季跳升到略低於 400,000 美元。這是在常態化區間內。

I will say, while I alluded to the dilutive impacts of Starplex, that is an area of opportunity for us to look at as we go forward, take a look at their pricing and see if there's some opportunities to drive more pricing. But, all in all, I don't know that we think that it, in and of itself, will have a large dilutive effect on our -- on the admissions revenue per screen that I just talked about on an annual basis.

我想說，雖然我提到 Starplex 的稀釋影響，但這也是我們未來可以著力的機會領域：檢視他們的定價，看看是否有機會提高票價。不過總體而言，我們不認為僅憑這一點，就會對我剛才談到的年度每銀幕入場收入造成很大的稀釋效應。

And I will take your second question.

我來回答你的第二個問題。

All those marketing programs that I talked about, stronger loyalty program, bigger database, more email and texting out to consumers to promote movies, that all applies to the core theaters every bit as much as it does to the reseated theaters. Similarly, AMC has a strategy in the past of really only going after a theater when it could do the whole theater. I think we're going to -- not I think, I happen to know -- we're going to take a more aggressive approach in looking at what we can do to improve the quality of the product, even in our core theaters without necessarily having to spend the capital to reseat the entire building.

我提到的那些行銷方案——更強的忠誠度計畫、更大的資料庫、更多以電子郵件與簡訊向消費者推廣電影——對核心影城的適用程度，絲毫不亞於對重新座椅改裝影城的適用程度。同樣地，AMC 過去的策略基本上只有在能把整個影城都改造時才會出手。我們將會——不是我認為，而是我確知——採取更積極的作法，去評估即使在核心影城中，不一定要投入把整棟建築全部換座椅的資本支出，我們也能做些什麼來提升產品品質。

There are a lot of things we can do in F&B. I already mentioned there are a lot of things we can do to put in better premium large-format screens, which clearly the public likes a lot. I think you will see a lot of effort not only directed at the theaters that are being wholly redone, but also at all the others in our system, as well.

在餐飲（F&B）方面我們能做的事情很多。我已經提到，我們也能做很多事來導入更好的高端大型格式（PLF）銀幕，而大眾顯然非常喜歡。我想你會看到，我們的努力不僅會集中在那些被全面翻新的影城，也會同樣投入到我們系統中的其他所有影城。

Just to add a little bit to that.

我再補充一點。

Certainly, the core, when we split out the reseated theaters, you get a pretty clear view of the core. They did certainly perform, as we said before, we don't expect it to perform as strong as the reseated theaters. It is -- so what can we do to drive the business there? Well, number one, we are chipping away, or I'd say we are working at that circuit to convert as many of those assets to reseated theaters. But we're also deploying the food and beverage initiatives there.

當然，當我們把重新座椅改裝影城拆分出來後，你就能很清楚地看到核心影城的表現。正如我們先前所說，它們確實有表現，但我們不預期它們會像重新座椅改裝影城那樣強勁。那麼，我們能做什麼來帶動那邊的業務？第一，我們正在逐步推進——或者我會說我們正在努力——把該院線中盡可能多的資產轉換為重新座椅改裝影城。同時，我們也在那裡部署餐飲計畫。

We had some pretty strong growth year over year in the quarter and on a year-to-date basis where the core on a per-head basis actually performed in line or a little better than the rest of the circuit in the food and beverage business. So, while we don't have them reseated yet, we are getting some good lift on the food and beverage side, and will continue to do that moving forward, as well.

本季以及年初至今，我們的年對年成長都相當強勁；就人均而言，核心影城在餐飲業務上的表現其實與院線其他部分一致，甚至略好一些。所以，雖然它們尚未完成換座椅改裝，我們在餐飲端已經取得不錯的提升，未來也會持續推進。

Thanks a lot.

非常感謝。

Ben Mogil, Stifel.

Ben Mogil，Stifel。

Good morning. Thanks for taking my question.

早安。謝謝讓我提問。

On the increased investments you're talking about with Stubs and more database marketing, if the Stubs customers were already big movie-goers, are you looking at this largely as trying to get competitors' patrons? Is there any reason to think that the core avid movie-goer would go anymore if they got more emails effectively?

關於你提到在 Stubs 以及更多資料庫行銷上的投資增加，如果 Stubs 客戶本來就是重度觀影者，你們主要是想爭取競爭對手的顧客嗎？有沒有理由認為，核心的重度觀影者如果只是收到更多電子郵件，就會更常去看電影？

A quick answer to a good question. Number one, yes. I think we can steal market share like crazy.

對這個好問題給個快速回答。第一，是的。我認為我們可以非常大幅地搶市占。

Number two, today we have a paid program where our competition has free programs. That puts Stubs at a substantial disadvantage. And many people who would enroll in Stubs who might be splitting their patronage amongst a variety of locations and theaters and circuits, could become much more loyal to AMC if they are in our program. And that's what we're about to make happen.

第二，目前我們是付費方案，而競爭對手有免費方案。這讓 Stubs 處於相當不利的地位。許多原本可能會加入 Stubs、但會在不同地點、影城與院線之間分散消費的人，如果加入我們的計畫，就可能對 AMC 更加忠誠。而這正是我們即將要促成的。

So is the thought to drop or to lower the payments?

所以你們的想法是要取消或降低費用嗎？

We will most likely keep the paid program, and we're actually going to test raising the price of the paid program, but we will also introduce a free program, as well. For those of you frequent flyer program members out there, think of Advantage and Advantage Gold, United MileagePlus and MileagePlus Premier. We will have two tiers, and we will make sure that our free program is appealing to movie-goers and that our paid program is even more appealing to movie-goers.

我們很可能會保留付費方案，而且其實會測試提高付費方案的價格；但同時也會推出免費方案。對於熟悉常旅客計畫的人來說，可以把它想成 Advantage 與 Advantage Gold、United MileagePlus 與 MileagePlus Premier。我們會有兩個等級，並確保免費方案對影迷有吸引力，而付費方案對影迷更具吸引力。

Thank you.

謝謝。

And I think it was the 16% attendance growth in the fourth quarter the renovated theaters and 22% box office growth, are those apples to apples? Are those against screens which were renovated in 4Q 2014, or does that include some ones that were renovated during FY15?

另外，我想是第四季翻新影城的出席人次成長 16% 以及票房成長 22%，這兩個是同口徑比較嗎？是拿 2014 年第四季已翻新的銀幕來比，還是包含了 2015 財年期間才翻新的那些？

No. That's the total group. That's all 93.

不是。那是整體群組，也就是全部 93 家。

If you were to strip out the ones last year that weren't renovated, which presumably obviously got a large lift on a same-store sales, what do you think the numbers would look like?

如果把去年那些尚未翻新的剔除掉——那些顯然在同店銷售上會有很大的拉升——你覺得數字大概會長什麼樣子？

First year is usually 50% to 60% bump in attendance.

第一年通常出席人次會增加 50% 到 60%。

Okay. That's fine. So if you were to strip those out, because I don't know how many you added during the year, if you were to strip those out, were we talking mid-teens revenue growth?

好，了解。那如果把那些剔除掉，因為我不知道你們一年內新增了多少家；如果剔除掉，我們談的是收入成長中十幾個百分點嗎？

For the rest of the group?

針對其餘那一組？

Yes.

是的。

Yes. At mid-teens on attendance.

是的，出席人次是中十幾個百分點。

On attendance. And what about on pricing? And high teens on pricing kind of thing?

出席人次。那票價呢？票價大概是十幾個百分點偏高那種嗎？

The pricing's probably going to be in the 6% to 8% on that group. The non-first-year group.

那一組的票價大概會在 6% 到 8%。也就是非第一年的那一組。

Okay. Great. I think that's it for me. Thank you very much.

好，很好。我這邊就這些了。非常感謝。

Eric Wold, B. Riley.

Eric Wold，B. Riley。

Thanks. Good morning.

謝謝，早安。

A couple questions. One, on the thought about creating a third PLF brand to complement IMAX and Dolby, you understand the move before we started ETX, which changed the prime machine to Dolby, was to offer a solution to some location and slate restrictions around IMAX to offer consumers another choice. Can you give some sense of how you'd start a third that would still provide a premium option to consumers without cannibalizing IMAX or Dolby, assuming this third option will be at a lower ticket price?

有幾個問題。第一，關於考慮打造第三個 PLF 品牌來補足 IMAX 與 Dolby：你也了解，在我們開始做 ETX 之前、把主放映系統改成 Dolby 的那一步，是為了因應 IMAX 在某些地點與片單上的限制，提供消費者另一種選擇。你能否說明一下，你們會如何啟動第三個方案，既能在不侵蝕 IMAX 或 Dolby 的前提下，仍為消費者提供高端選項？假設這第三個選項的票價會更低。

As you know, we give a substantial -- I don't know that we've disclosed the amount, but as you would expect, Dolby and IMAX have a substantial cut in the revenues of their PLF screens. And there are some markets where consumers won't be willing to pay the required up charge that we need to get in order to give Dolby and IMAX their fair share of the revenue at IMAX and Dolby houses.

如你所知，我們會給予相當可觀的——我不確定我們是否披露過金額，但如你所料——Dolby 與 IMAX 會從其 PLF 銀幕的收入中分得相當可觀的一部分。而在某些市場，消費者不願意支付我們所需的加價幅度，因為我們必須靠那個加價才能讓 Dolby 與 IMAX 在其影廳中取得合理的分成。

Right now the solution for AMC has to be that if the markets can't pay admission prices to give Dolby or IMAX their cuts, we can't offer them a large-screen auditorium. But, if it's a private label PLF, totally internal, then there is no third-party split, and therefore we can a charge lower price to the consumer.

目前對 AMC 而言的解法是：如果某些市場無法承受足以讓 Dolby 或 IMAX 取得其分成的入場票價，我們就無法在那裡提供大型銀幕影廳。但如果是自有品牌的 PLF、完全內部化，那就沒有第三方分成，因此我們可以向消費者收取更低的價格。

Think of secondary or tertiary markets where disposable income is not as high, where consumers are more price sensitive, but still would enjoy a large screen. It may not be as spectacular as a large screen equipped with Dolby Cinema or equipped with IMAX, but it still going to be a significantly larger screen, with sufficient bells and whistles to make it a very good movie-going experience in that particular market.

可以想像在次級或第三級市場，可支配所得沒那麼高、消費者對價格更敏感，但仍會喜歡大銀幕。它可能不會像配備 Dolby Cinema 或 IMAX 的大銀幕那麼震撼，但仍會是顯著更大的銀幕，並具備足夠的附加功能，讓該市場的觀影體驗非常不錯。

That's helpful too, to know it's not going to be in a competitive market or the same auditorium or near your other IMAX and Dolby sites. I appreciate that.

這也很有幫助，讓我們知道它不會是在競爭激烈的市場、同一個影廳，或靠近你們其他 IMAX 與 Dolby 據點。我很感謝。

I didn't say that. Because there's also the option that within a theater equipped with IMAX today for example, if the market was really robust, we could add a Dolby Cinema to a movie theater where IMAX already exists, as we did at Empire in New York and Burbank in LA.

我沒有那樣說。因為還有另一種選項：例如在目前已配備 IMAX 的影城裡，如果市場真的很強勁，我們可以在已經有 IMAX 的影城再加設一個 Dolby Cinema，就像我們在紐約的 Empire 以及洛杉磯的 Burbank 所做的一樣。

But you can envision other theaters where there's -- where there will be an IMAX screen or a Dolby screen. Again, where the market can support one PLF at a price lift that might be 50%, 60% higher than a normal ticket price. And the market could probably support another PLF, but not one at as high a price as the IMAX or Dolby Cinema auditorium.

但你也可以想像其他影城會有——會有一個 IMAX 螢幕或一個 Dolby 螢幕。同樣地，在市場能支撐一個 PLF、且票價溢價可能比一般票價高出 50%、60% 的地方。而市場大概也能再支撐另一個 PLF，但其價格不會高到像 IMAX 或 Dolby Cinema 影廳那麼高。

So, again, you could actually find a second PLF going into a movie theater, but -- the experience would be better than 2-D house, not as good as an IMAX house or a Dolby Cinema house. The price would be higher than a 2-D normal traditional theater, but not as high as an IMAX screen.

所以，再說一次，你其實可能會看到第二個 PLF 進入同一家影城，但——體驗會比一般 2-D 影廳更好，卻不如 IMAX 影廳或 Dolby Cinema 影廳。票價會高於傳統一般 2-D 影廳，但不會高到像 IMAX 螢幕那樣。

Again, it's an ability to offer a less expensive PLF, and other major movie chains have private label PLFs that are successful. Just look at the numbers. 3% of the screens, 9% of the revenues, that tells us the consumer is looking for more and more large-screen experiences.

同樣地，這是一種提供較便宜 PLF 的能力，而其他大型院線也有成功的自有品牌 PLF。看看數字就知道：3% 的銀幕、9% 的營收，這告訴我們消費者愈來愈在尋求大銀幕體驗。

That's helpful. Last question.

這很有幫助。最後一個問題。

As you think about the slate and box office for 2016, it's easier -- if you have a differentiated view from most consensus that 2016 may not be as bad as fears. That being said, even if this year is flattish with last year, can you talk about AMC's ability to at least maintain or possibly even grow margins in a flat box office environment if that happens this year?

當你們看 2016 年的片單與票房時，如果你們的看法與市場共識不同，認為 2016 年可能沒有大家擔心的那麼糟，這會比較容易。話雖如此，即使今年票房與去年持平，你能否談談：若今年真的出現票房持平的環境，AMC 至少維持、甚至可能提升利潤率的能力如何？

Number one, we're going to benefit from the Starplex acquisition, so we will have more screens. And we told you we brought them into our system efficiently. We told you we will do stronger market share that has a stronger marketing ability that has the ability to take market share. And we will see.

第一，我們會受惠於 Starplex 的收購，所以我們會有更多銀幕。我們也告訴過各位，我們很有效率地把它們納入我們的系統。我們也說過，我們會有更強的市占表現、具備更強的行銷能力、也有能力去取得市占。我們會看到結果。

As for the slate in 2016, all of you who were forecasting movies in 2016 did not anticipate Deadpool would perform as it has. Disney has a very strong slate of films coming out this year.

至於 2016 年的片單，你們所有在預測 2016 年電影表現的人，都沒有預期《死侍》會有現在這樣的表現。迪士尼今年也有非常強的片單要上映。

We are buffered somewhat. If revenues are more sluggish, film rental costs would come down. And in particular, Star Wars had much higher film rental costs than the traditional movie. So, I wouldn't be surprised if average film rental costs came down in 2016 if we don't have a blockbuster like Star Wars.

我們在某種程度上有緩衝。如果營收較疲弱，片租成本會下降。尤其《星際大戰》的片租成本遠高於一般電影。所以，如果 2016 年沒有像《星際大戰》這樣的超級大片，我不會意外平均片租成本在 2016 年會下降。

We'd rather have a blockbuster like Star Wars. We'd rather -- we'd happily pay the higher costs if we got $1 billion of revenue as an industry in the first three weeks.

我們寧可有像《星際大戰》那樣的大片。我們寧可——如果整個產業在前三週能有 10 億美元的營收，我們也很樂意支付更高的成本。

Perfect. Thank you.

很好。謝謝。

Barton Crockett, FBR Capital.

Barton Crockett，FBR Capital。

Great. Thanks for taking the question. I wanted to ask a little bit around the studio side.

很好。謝謝讓我提問。我想問一些關於片廠端的問題。

I'm very appreciative of your comment that you're not going to go too deep into M&A speculation. So I will keep this broader into Maddock as much as I can. There is this basically announcement out of Viacom that they're looking for minority investors in their Paramount studio, and you have been successful in the studio business now with Open Road. You have a big partner in Dalian Wanda over in China.

我非常感謝你提到你不會太深入談併購（M&A）揣測。所以我會盡量把問題維持在更宏觀、也盡可能聚焦在 Maddock。Viacom 基本上宣布他們正在為旗下 Paramount 片廠尋找少數股權投資人，而你們透過 Open Road 在片廠業務上已經取得成功。你們在中國也有一個很大的合作夥伴——大連萬達。

Could you talk about thematically whether this concept of maybe owning a stake in a large major studio as opposed to just a smaller one might be appealing at some level for you or for your partners in China that could help you in some way? Or are there antitrust concerns that make it a non-starter with consent decrees?

你能否從主題性的角度談談：相較於只持有較小片廠，若持有一家大型主流片廠的股權，這個概念在某種程度上對你們或你們在中國的合作夥伴是否具有吸引力、並可能在某些方面對你們有幫助？或者是否存在反托拉斯疑慮，使得在同意判決（consent decrees）下根本不可行？

Let me say that while we're very close to Wanda, we talk for AMC, and Wanda talks for Wanda. So, I can't speculate on Wanda's interest in anything. But you are free to call them.

我先說，雖然我們和萬達關係非常密切，但我們代表 AMC 發言，萬達代表萬達發言。所以我無法揣測萬達對任何事情的興趣。不過你可以自由致電他們。

As for AMC, I said I wasn't going to comment on M&A activity, so I shouldn't comment on M&A activity. It's a slippery slope, because once you comment on the first one, then you have to comment on every other. But I will say that in the spirit of my remarks, I was talking about adding movie theaters to AMC so that we could bring theaters in efficiently, into our current system as we did with Starplex where we grew our theaters by 10% and did not grow our SG&A by a bp.

至於 AMC，我說過我不會評論併購活動，所以我不應該評論併購活動。這是一條很滑的坡，因為一旦你評論了第一個，就得評論其他每一個。但我會說，呼應我先前的談話精神，我談的是把更多影城納入 AMC，讓我們能像收購 Starplex 那樣有效率地把影城導入現有系統：我們的影城數量增加了 10%，而 SG&A 卻沒有增加哪怕 1 個 bp。

Okay. But to push this a little bit, do you see value in potentially owning more studio assets? You've had success with Open Road, or is that really not on your radar screen?

好的。但再追問一下，你是否認為持有更多片廠資產可能有價值？你們在 Open Road 有成功經驗，還是說這真的不在你們的雷達上？

My focus is on making our movie theater network larger. And beyond that, I want to stay out of the business of the speculating about changing the Company's fortunes through acquisition.

我的重點是讓我們的影城網路更大。除此之外，我希望避免透過收購來揣測、或試圖改變公司命運的那種做法。

I've noticed that others in this industry are talkative about what they might do. But I'd rather under promise then over deliver. And I love to tell you what we're able to have done rather than constantly be speculating about what we might do.

我注意到這個產業裡有些人很愛談他們可能會做什麼。但我寧可少承諾、再超額交付。我也更喜歡告訴你們我們已經做到了什麼，而不是不斷揣測我們可能會做什麼。

Let's just make sure we're all clear. My priority is to grow the number of theaters in our circuit.

我們再確認清楚：我的優先事項是增加我們院線中的影城數量。

Okay. All right.

好的。了解。

On that growing the number of theaters, again, respectful of your desire not to go too far down this road, but also recognizing we're going to get a lot more from you, so I want to understand as best I can: you're new CEO -- where your focus is on the M&A front.

關於增加影城數量這件事，再次尊重你不想在這條路上走太遠的意願，但也認知到我們之後還會從你這裡聽到更多，所以我想盡可能理解：你是新任 CEO——在併購（M&A）方面，你的重點會放在哪裡？

In the past I've thought about AMC as a big city circuit. Starplex got you a little bit away from that. How do you think of your acquisition focus going forward? Is it big city focused, or do you think you need to look, would potentially see opportunities in any range of small to big cities?

過去我一直把 AMC 視為大城市院線。Starplex 讓你們稍微偏離了那個定位。你怎麼看未來的收購重點？會以大城市為主嗎？還是你認為需要看、也可能在從小城市到大城市的任何範圍中看到機會？

It's a pretty simple financial transaction in my head. If we can bring theaters into our system efficiently and where we are rapidly accretive, that's a higher priority than finding the perfect theater and overpaying for it.

在我腦中這是一筆相當簡單的財務交易。如果我們能有效率地把影城納入我們的系統，並且能快速增厚（accretive），那就比找到所謂完美影城卻為此付出過高價格更重要。

Having said that, there are markets where we're not present, where adding theaters would be complementary to our current system. There are other markets where we are present where we may be present in a city, but we're not present in a particular part of the city and we could expand our circuit by filling out the Metropolitan District.

話雖如此，有些市場我們尚未進入，新增影城會與我們現有系統形成互補。也有些市場我們已經在其中——我們可能在某個城市有據點，但在該城市的某個區域沒有據點，我們可以透過補齊都會區版圖來擴大我們的院線。

We are wide open as to what we'd look at as long as we can buy it right. And you've heard my definition of buying it right. We bring it in efficiently and we're looking for things that are quickly accretive.

只要我們能買得對，我們對於要看什麼標的都非常開放。你也聽過我對「買得對」的定義：我們能有效率地把它導入，並且我們在找的是能快速增厚的標的。

I'd punctuate it quickly, you mentioned Starplex. We also acquired some rural market theaters in the Kerasotes acquisition and have satisfied ourselves that we're capable of operating in those markets as successfully as we do in the major markets.

我再強調「快速」這點，你提到 Starplex。我們在收購 Kerasotes 時也收購了一些鄉村市場的影城，並且我們已經確認，我們有能力在那些市場的營運表現，和在主要市場一樣成功。

So, we feel like we can really acquire assets anywhere. But we do have some filters and tests on the right types of assets that we want to buy. We won't shy away from smaller markets.

所以，我們覺得我們幾乎可以在任何地方收購資產。但我們確實有一些篩選條件與測試，用來判斷我們想買的資產類型。我們不會迴避較小的市場。

And it goes without saying that when -- studios like to talk about tent poles. Well in the theater business, we have tent pole theaters, too, because we have theaters with incredibly productive screens.

而且不言而喻的是——片廠喜歡談所謂的「帳篷柱」（tent poles）。那麼在影城業務裡，我們也有「帳篷柱影城」，因為我們有一些影城的銀幕產出極高。

If you were going to bring in less profitable theaters, you'd have to make sure that you're absolutely maniacal about keeping their cost structure intact, because there are certain theaters that are more thinly trafficked and therefore have to operate with lower cost structure. Again, to me, the secret is buying right, not necessarily what the theater is.

如果你要納入獲利較差的影城，你必須確保自己對維持其成本結構極度嚴格，因為有些影城的人流較稀薄，因此必須以較低的成本結構來營運。同樣地，對我而言，關鍵在於買得對，而不一定在於影城本身是什麼。

Okay. And then just one small number question. What's your current feeling about your CapEx level for 2016?

好的。接著只有一個小的數字問題。你目前對於 2016 年的資本支出（CapEx）水準感覺如何？

So, guidance on the CapEx, we think next year our total CapEx will range from $390 million to a little over $400 million. Gross CapEx, we've talked before about landlords helping us on a number of these projects, willing to invest. We think the landlord contribution based on discussions we've had is anywhere from $120 million to $140 million. That will net down to $270 million, $250 million to $270 million, which is similar to where we were in 2015.

關於資本支出（CapEx）的指引，我們認為明年我們的總 CapEx 將落在 3.9 億美元到略高於 4 億美元之間。就總額 CapEx 而言，我們之前談過房東在不少專案上會協助我們、願意投入資金。我們認為根據目前的討論，房東的出資大約在 1.2 億到 1.4 億美元之間。扣除後將淨額降到 2.5 億到 2.7 億美元（約 2.7 億美元），這與我們 2015 年的水準相近。

Okay. Thank you.

好的。謝謝。

Jim Goss, Barrington Research.

Jim Goss，Barrington Research。

Thanks. Adam, as a marketing executive, you seem very interested in refinement and nuanced strategies. I know there has been discussion about looking at types of reseats that might not take out as many seats, maybe not recline as much. Could be spaced a little more closely so you don't lose as much potential capacity in the market, or in the theater.

謝謝。Adam，作為一位行銷主管，你似乎非常重視精進與更細緻的策略。我知道一直有在討論，是否研究某些類型的重新換座方案，可能不會減少那麼多座位、也許不會躺得那麼平，座位間距可以稍微更近一些，這樣你就不會在市場或影廳裡損失那麼多潛在容量。

Do you have any thoughts of perhaps involving both the full recliners and the smaller recliners within the same theater complex, in the way that if you -- you know there's only a two-week window usually within a movie in IMAX, and then it will probably move to other screens and then create incentive to get the best seats in the earlier weeks and that sort of thing and have a varied option within a theater complex?

你是否有想過在同一個影城內同時配置全躺式座椅與較小型的躺椅？例如——你知道，一部電影在 IMAX 通常只有兩週的窗口期，之後可能會移到其他銀幕，這樣就能在前幾週創造誘因讓觀眾去買最好的座位之類的，並在同一個影城內提供多樣化選項？

The simple answer to your question is, yes. I think I said in an earlier question, AMC's strategy heretofore has to do the whole theater or don't touch it. There are some theaters where we can't necessarily afford the seat because they are so well trafficked. We can't necessarily afford the seat loss of reseating an entire building, but that doesn't mean you can't reseat an auditorium or multiple auditoriums, but not the whole theater.

對你問題的簡單回答是：是的。我想我在前面一個問題也提到，AMC 迄今的策略是要嘛整個影城一起做，不然就不要動。有些影城因為人流非常大，我們未必負擔得起換座椅所帶來的影響——我們未必承受得起把整棟都重新換座所造成的座位損失；但這不代表你不能只重整一個影廳或多個影廳，而不是整個影城。

Similarly, I think in a world of reserved seating, which is clearly the way movie-going is trending and the way AMC is trending, once you've got reserve treating, I actually don't see any reason why you can't go within an auditorium, and have two different types of seats within an auditorium and a reserved seating context. You'd lose less seats. And if you wanted more comfortable or more spacious or more fully reclining seats, you'd pay a price premium to sit in those rows rather than to sit in the part of the theater that is not having as much density loss. That might be the way to extend the economics of the reseating projects into more and more locations.

同樣地，我認為在劃位（reserved seating）的世界裡——這顯然是觀影趨勢、也是 AMC 的趨勢——一旦你有了劃位，我其實看不出為什麼不能在同一個影廳裡，在劃位的情境下，提供兩種不同類型的座椅。你會少損失一些座位。如果你想要更舒適、更寬敞或可完全躺平的座椅，你就為坐在那些排付出溢價，而不是坐在密度損失較小的區域。這可能是把重新換座專案的經濟性延伸到更多地點的一種方式。

Okay. Very interesting.

好的。非常有意思。

Also, your discussion about a third PLF; it sounds like you are in some way re-creating the ETX program you had had and that you have all the economics and you'd have more control over everything without having to pay a premium to either Dolby or IMAX.

另外，你提到第三種 PLF；聽起來你在某種程度上是在重新打造你們曾經有過的 ETX 計畫，而且你們掌握所有經濟效益，也能對所有事情有更多控制，而不必向 Dolby 或 IMAX 支付溢價。

How many of the original ETX screens wound up shifting over to the Dolby cinema at AMC Prime? How many are left and is that a fair comparison?

最初的 ETX 銀幕有多少最後轉到 AMC Prime 的 Dolby Cinema？還剩多少？這樣類比公平嗎？

I don't think you should worry about how many of the old private label we have left. There are going to be a lot more Dolby Cinemas than there are today. There will be more IMAX theaters than there are today. We will be expanding the Dolbys and IMAXs more quickly than we will be introducing the PLF, the private label PLFs.

我認為你不需要太在意我們還剩多少舊的自有品牌（private label）。未來 Dolby Cinema 的數量會比現在多很多；IMAX 影廳也會比現在多。我們擴張 Dolby 與 IMAX 的速度會快於我們導入 PLF（自有品牌 PLF）的速度。

There aren't too many ETXs left. It's like 10 or something. My sense is they will be gobbled up pretty soon by either Dolby or IMAX. But still, there's lots of opportunity for us to think about this as we go down the pike.

剩下的 ETX 不多了，大概 10 個左右。我的感覺是它們很快就會被 Dolby 或 IMAX 吸收。不過，隨著我們往前推進，仍然有很多機會讓我們思考這件事。

Okay. Last question. Netflix and Crouching Tiger and the refusal of theaters to play it, which is totally understandable: is this the line in the sand with Netflix, or do you think that's going to be a continuing issue you will be dealing with?

好的。最後一個問題。Netflix、《臥虎藏龍》，以及戲院拒絕放映——這完全可以理解：這會是你們對 Netflix 劃下的界線嗎？還是你認為這會是你們將持續面對的議題？

I think it's probably smarter -- I said I'd be honest and transparent and candid, but I don't think it's a good idea for me to make public comments about how we're going to take on a particular competitor. It smacks to me that the Justice Department might be reading the transcript pretty closely.

我想更明智的做法是——我說過我會誠實、透明、坦率——但我不認為我公開評論我們將如何應對某個特定競爭對手是個好主意。這讓我覺得司法部可能會非常仔細地閱讀逐字稿。

Let me just say, I wasn't around when the Crouching Tiger controversy occurred a year ago. We actually did wind up as a favor to IMAX showing Crouching Tiger, and I believe four, maybe was a few more, maybe five or six, or a handful of theaters out about 153 IMAX screens. And the language of choice for those few screenings was Mandarin, which, I don't know that any of us on this call speak. But, I will cross and we, AMC, will cross future bridges of competition if, as, and when they arise.

我只想說，一年前《臥虎藏龍》的爭議發生時我不在。我們最後確實是為了幫 IMAX 一個忙而放映了《臥虎藏龍》，我相信是在 153 個 IMAX 銀幕中有四個——也許多一點，可能五或六個，總之是少數幾家戲院。那幾場放映所選用的語言是中文（普通話），我不知道我們這通電話裡是否有人會說。不過，未來若競爭的橋樑出現，AMC 會在需要時、在適當時機再去面對。

All right. Thanks, very much.

好。非常感謝。

Thank you. Chad Beynon, Macquarie.

謝謝。Chad Beynon，Macquarie。

Thanks for taking my questions. First, I wanted to go back to capital allocation.

謝謝讓我提問。首先，我想回到資本配置（capital allocation）。

You've dabbled a little bit on the M&A. You spoke about your enthusiasm around the future of the business in the next couple of years. And Craig, you gave the CapEx guidance.

你們在併購（M&A）方面有稍微嘗試過。你談到你對未來一兩年業務前景的熱忱。而 Craig，你也給了 CapEx 指引。

A two-parter on capital allocation. One, just want to understand that the focus is clearly on growth in ROIC on the initiatives versus potential dividend increases and share repurchases.

關於資本配置有兩個部分。第一，我想確認焦點顯然是放在各項措施帶動的 ROIC 成長，而不是潛在的股利提高與庫藏股回購。

And then secondly, if there are an inordinate amount of opportunities, Craig, would you and the team be willing to lever up the balance sheet to maybe capitalize on these? Thanks. And then I have a follow-up.

第二，如果機會特別多，Craig，你和團隊是否願意提高資產負債表的槓桿，來把握這些機會？謝謝。然後我還有一個追問。

So, capital allocation priorities fairly consistent with our prior message that we will reinvest in growing our circuit internally. Organic growth through the deployment of receipts, food and beverage concepts and other strategic initiatives, that's first and foremost.

我們的資本配置優先順序與先前傳達的訊息相當一致：我們會再投資於內部擴張我們的院線。透過座椅改造、餐飲概念以及其他策略性措施來推動有機成長，這是第一優先。

Closely behind is acquisitions where we find opportunities to grow. Third, would probably be to look at capital return once we've exhausted the opportunities. But I have to admit we feel we have a couple year runway left on very solid investment opportunities internally. And time will tell what the acquisition opportunities are.

緊接在後的是在我們看到能帶來成長的機會時進行收購。第三，可能是在我們用盡這些機會之後，再來看資本回饋。不過我必須承認，我們覺得內部仍有幾年的跑道，存在非常扎實的投資機會。至於併購機會如何，時間會告訴我們。

On a leverage basis, we're certainly comfortable where we are today, 3.5 times levered. As I've said before, we'd take the leverage up into over 4 times if we had the right acquisition opportunity. We've operated the business successfully at higher levels.

就槓桿而言，我們對目前的水準相當安心，槓桿倍數為 3.5 倍。正如我之前說過的，如果有合適的收購機會，我們會把槓桿提高到 4 倍以上。我們過去也曾在更高的槓桿水準下成功經營這門生意。

We would want to see a path, even if we took it above 4, we'd want to see a pathway back down and possibly as an opportunity to use equity at some point to bring leverage down, as well. But, we are comfortable at 3.5, but taking it above 4 times is certainly, doesn't make us uncomfortable as long as we see a pathway back down below 4.

即使我們把槓桿拉到 4 倍以上，我們也希望看到一條回到較低水準的路徑；也可能在某個時點使用股權（equity）來降低槓桿。但我們對 3.5 倍感到舒適；只要看得到回到 4 倍以下的路徑，把槓桿提高到 4 倍以上當然不會讓我們不安。

I'd like to add one comment specifically on capital return, because in prior lives, I've been a huge proponent of capital return. I would note that others in our industry pay higher dividends than we do as a percentage yield, so that's something that logically we should look at as we believe we have the balance sheet to permanently sustain a dividend. Because you certainly never want to take a dividend up and ever be forced to take it down.

我想特別補充一點關於資本回饋，因為在我過去的職涯中，我一直是資本回饋的強力支持者。我會注意到，我們產業中的其他公司以殖利率（percentage yield）計算，支付的股利比我們高，所以這在邏輯上是我們應該檢視的方向，因為我們相信我們有資產負債表可以長期支撐股利。畢竟你絕對不希望把股利提高後，未來又被迫調降。

But the other issue that I think is somewhat new and unique to our Company, and I'm actually curious to what your views are on the subject. I realize this conference call isn't the vehicle where we can do it, but when I hear from you individually I'm sure you will have views. In a normal situation, companies and management teams are recommending stock buy-backs all the time. We are not a normal situation. Only 25% of our shares are in the public float.

但我認為還有另一個對我們公司而言相對新且獨特的議題，我其實也很好奇你對這個主題的看法。我知道這通電話會議不是適合深入討論的場合，但當我個別聽到你們的意見時，我相信你們會有看法。在一般情況下，公司與管理團隊經常建議進行股票回購。我們不是一般情況：我們只有 25% 的股份在公開流通（public float）。

And I do think it's important that we have enough shares out there that institutions can come in, as they wish, knowing that there's sufficient liquidity in the stock that they can get out when they wish. And so things that reduce the share count to levels lower than where we are today is something that might actually turn out to be a big negative for AMC, which is counterintuitive because share buy-back is a very popular thing. But we need to make sure that the float is big enough that institutions want to think about us.

而且我確實認為，我們必須確保市場上有足夠的流通股，讓機構投資人可以在他們想要的時候進來，同時也知道這檔股票具有足夠的流動性，讓他們在想要退出時也能退出。因此，任何把股數降到比我們今天更低的作法，可能反而會對 AMC 造成很大的負面影響；這點有些反直覺，因為庫藏股回購是一件非常受歡迎的事。但我們必須確保流通股本（float）夠大，讓機構願意把我們納入考量。

Okay. Thanks.

好的。謝謝。

And Adam, you led off the call with the comment that the Open Road team has a new trophy on their mantle and congratulations to that. Can you help us think about what this accomplishment means for that entity?

Adam，你在電話會議一開始提到 Open Road 團隊在壁爐台上又多了一座新獎盃，先恭喜他們。你能否協助我們理解，這項成就對那個實體意味著什麼？

If it improves the overall brand for consumers? If it will start to see more movies produced and distributed? If you could round out some thoughts on that, that will be helpful. Thanks.

它是否會提升消費者對整體品牌的觀感？是否會開始看到更多電影被製作並發行？如果你能補充一些想法，會很有幫助。謝謝。

Well, the exhibiting of movies is a fairly stable business. The business of moviemaking is a pretty volatile business. And even though we've invested $20 million of cash into Open Road previously, we've chosen to carry it on our balance sheet conservatively at zero value.

嗯，電影放映是一個相當穩定的業務；電影製作則是一個相當波動的業務。即使我們先前已投入 2,000 萬美元現金到 Open Road，我們仍選擇在資產負債表上以保守方式將其帳面價值列為零。

So there's some hidden intrinsic value on our balance sheet in Open Road. You've got to assume -- the way that distribution companies like Open Road make money is, one, if they are successful at it, making money as they show films. And number two, amassing a substantial library of films which have a long-time use for repeat licensing and home entertainment down the road.

所以在我們的資產負債表上，Open Road 其實存在一些隱含的內在價值。你必須假設——像 Open Road 這類發行公司賺錢的方式是：第一，如果他們做得成功，透過上映影片來獲利；第二，累積一個可觀的片庫，而這些影片在未來可透過重複授權與家用娛樂等方式長期變現。

So, number one benefit, or not the number one benefit, but the immediate benefit for Open Road is the value of its library just got higher because Spotlight is going to be a very valuable asset in its film library and will generate income for years to come. The other thing though that it should do for Open Road, Open Road has made a number of movies over the past four or five years, and when you have the prestige of having made -- and they just didn't buy this at a film festival, they made this one -- the best picture of the year, that's going to draw more filmmakers to think about Open Road as a place to distribute -- make or distribute good movies. And generally, good movies are more profitable than bad movies.

因此，Open Road 的一個好處——也不一定是第一大好處——但最直接的好處是：它的片庫價值剛剛提高了，因為《驚爆焦點》（Spotlight）將成為其片庫中非常有價值的資產，並在未來多年帶來收入。另一方面，這也應該會為 Open Road 帶來更多效益。Open Road 在過去四、五年製作了多部電影，而當你擁有「製作了——而且他們不是在影展買下來的，他們是自己做出來的——年度最佳影片」這樣的聲望時，會吸引更多電影人把 Open Road 視為一個可以製作或發行好電影的地方。一般而言，好電影比壞電影更賺錢。

So, I think what we're going to see is this is just such a shot in the arm of prestige for Open Road that you ought to have a more attractive slate of movies in the years ahead, not necessarily films that are already in the can, and are going to be distributed in two weeks, but films that are going to be made. More artists, and I use the term deliberately, are going to want to associate themselves with the kind of firm that was behind Spotlight. So, it's really good for them, and we own 50% of Open Road, so it's really good for us too.

所以我認為，我們將看到的是：這對 Open Road 來說是一劑強心針般的聲望提升，未來幾年他們的片單應該會更具吸引力——不一定是那些已經拍完、兩週後就要發行的片子，而是那些即將被製作的片子。會有更多藝術家——我刻意用這個詞——想要與曾經支持《驚爆焦點》的公司建立關聯。所以這對他們非常好，而我們持有 Open Road 50% 的股權，因此對我們也非常好。

Okay. Thank you very much.

好的。非常感謝。

Thank you. Jason Bazinet, Citi.

謝謝。下一位是 Citi 的 Jason Bazinet。

You started off talking about the seven main priorities that you have for AMC going forward. My question was this: were there any areas of focus under the, under Mr. Lopez's leadership that you think will get less emphasis going forward?

你一開始談到未來 AMC 的七大主要優先事項。我想問的是：在 Lopez 先生領導之下，有沒有任何你認為未來會被降低強調的重點領域？

That is an interesting question. And the answer is no. I think what Jerry was emphasizing to AMC 's great credit was what, I believe, was the second of my seven planks. That is, making the theater experience better and better.

這是個有趣的問題。答案是否定的。我認為 Jerry 對 AMC 的強調——這也非常值得肯定——正是我七大支柱中的第二項：也就是讓觀影體驗越來越好。

You had close to 100 theaters wholly reseated. We went on a path of 150 plus IMAX theaters, as well as the launch of a pilot for Dolby Cinema, which when you see the product is a great product. It's a wonderful way to watch a movie.

你們已經有接近 100 家影城完成全館座椅更換。我們也走在建置 150 家以上 IMAX 影廳的路徑上，同時也推出 Dolby Cinema 的試點；當你看到那個產品時，它確實很棒，是一種非常精彩的觀影方式。

We've had, I think it's close to 100 or 200 MacGuffins bars have been put in the lobbies of our theaters. I've never known anyone to lose money selling alcohol. So I'm not surprised that we are industry-leading in food and beverage profits per patron.

我們已經在影城大廳設置了我想接近 100 或 200 間的 MacGuffins 酒吧。我從沒聽過有人賣酒會賠錢。所以我不意外我們在每位觀眾的餐飲獲利方面是業界領先。

And I'm a fully supportive of those priorities. And if anything, I think they are so well proven that we ought to do more of them faster, and as we said on this call earlier, do partial theater renovations when we can make progress for some screens in the theater, but not necessarily the whole theater.

而且我完全支持這些優先事項。甚至可以說，這些作法已被充分驗證，我們應該更快、做得更多。正如我們在本次電話會議稍早所說，當我們能在影城內針對部分影廳取得進展時，就先做局部翻新，而不一定要一次翻新整間影城。

So, no, I don't want to leave anything of Jerry's on the wayside. He did a fine job leading this company. Having said that, I think there's some more things that we can do in addition, and I laid them out on this call.

所以，不，我不想把 Jerry 的任何作法擱置一旁。他帶領這家公司做得很好。話雖如此，我認為我們還能額外做一些事情，我也在這通電話會議中把它們列出來了。

Thank you very much.

非常感謝。

Anthony Nemoto, Credit Suisse.

下一位是 Credit Suisse 的 Anthony Nemoto。

Thanks for taking questions. Two if I may. On the January investor call, you mentioned the financial impact of the marketing issues possibly coming through in the second half of 2016 time frame. Just wondering if that would still hold today as you see it.

謝謝讓我提問。我有兩個問題可以嗎？在 1 月的投資人電話會議上，你提到行銷議題可能帶來的財務影響，可能會在 2016 年下半年這個時間框架內顯現。我想確認一下，以你目前的觀察，這個說法今天是否仍然成立。

And then secondly, on the Paramount deal, are there any directional indicators of how that has performed in terms of the downstream monetization and how you might be thinking about future similar deals? Thank you.

第二個問題，關於 Paramount 的合作案：就後端變現（downstream monetization）的表現而言，有沒有任何方向性的指標？以及你們如何看待未來類似合作案？謝謝。

Yes, on the earlier call, I said that if we're going to see any financial return from the marketing initiatives, it won't be before the second half, because most of the new marketing activity is going to be worked on in the first half of the year and rolled out nationally in the second half. How quickly it kicks in, we will have to see. It would be nice if it kicks in right away, in which case, we get some benefit in the second half of 2016.

是的，在先前那通電話會議上我說過，如果行銷計畫要帶來任何財務回報，不會早於下半年，因為大部分新的行銷活動會在上半年進行規劃與推動，並在下半年於全國推廣。它會多快開始發酵，我們還得再觀察。如果能立刻見效，那麼我們在 2016 年下半年就能獲得一些好處。

And certainly we know, we've got some targets internally. We have some aggressive targets internally. And we like reporting record results to you, and we will be focus on doing what we can to deliver for shareholders.

而且我們當然知道，我們內部有一些目標，也有一些相當積極的目標。我們也喜歡向各位報告創紀錄的成果，我們會專注於盡我們所能為股東交出成績。

On the second question, there's no great learning from the Paramount test. There is a sense it was modestly successful, but no other studios have seemed to rush down that road. The whole issue of Windows is going to be a much larger, longer question that's going to spread into 2017 and beyond.

至於第二個問題，從 Paramount 的測試中沒有得到什麼重大的啟示。整體感覺是它算是小幅成功，但其他片商似乎並沒有急著走同一條路。所謂發行窗口期（Windows）的議題，將會是一個更大、也更長期的問題，會延伸到 2017 年及之後。

Got it. Great. Thanks.

了解。很好。謝謝。

Thank you. Please go ahead, sir.

謝謝。先生，請繼續。

We have more questions, or are we done?

我們還有更多問題嗎？還是已經結束了？

No, we have no more questions at this time.

不，目前沒有更多問題。

Good. I wanted to conclude the call by saying that I think I made the longest CEO statement on this call that I've done in 20 years as a chief executive officer. It's only been matched by your questions.

很好。我想在結束前說，我想我在這通電話會議上的 CEO 發言，是我 20 年擔任執行長以來最長的一次。唯一能與之匹敵的，就是各位的提問。

So, the fact that you're still with us an hour and a half into this call, we greatly appreciate your interest in AMC. I promise you that on all future conference calls, I'm going to shoot for 20 to 25 to maybe disastrously 30 minutes of comments, not 50.

所以，在這通電話會議進行了一個半小時之後，各位仍然在線上，我們非常感謝各位對 AMC 的關注。我向各位保證，在未來所有的電話會議上，我會把發言時間目標控制在 20 到 25 分鐘，或最多（也許會很災難性地）30 分鐘，而不是 50 分鐘。

And thank you very much for your interest in our Company. We appreciate it. And I hope we get a chance to meet individually between now and the next call.

也非常感謝各位對本公司的關注。我們很感激。並且希望在下一次電話會議之前，有機會與各位一對一見面交流。

Thank you. This concludes today's conference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. We thank you for your participation.

謝謝。今天的會議到此結束。您現在可以掛斷電話線。感謝各位的參與。