- Movie lovers complain the subscription deal isn’t truly “unlimited”.
- ARB rules key exclusions were hidden from consumers.
- The case sparks broader discussion about transparency in advertising.
It sounded like the ultimate movie-lover’s dream: unlimited tickets for one flat monthly fee. But for South Africans, Ster-Kinekor Morvies Club misleading advertising claims quickly turned the deal into a plot twist.
Exclusions tucked away in fine print and a three-month subscription lock-in left customers feeling misled, and they took their complaints to the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB).
When Ster-Kinekor launched its Morvies Club subscription for R399 a month, it promised “bottomless movie tickets per month” plus 20% off a Regular Combo. For avid cinema-goers, it seemed like a golden ticket to binge-watch every blockbuster.
But one consumer soon realised that the “unlimited” claim wasn’t all it seemed. IMAX and Cinema Prestige formats, premium experiences that include 2D and 3D films, were excluded. Even worse, these restrictions only became visible late in the booking process. To add to the frustration, the subscription carried a three-month minimum commitment that wasn’t disclosed in the ad itself.
Feeling deceived, the customer lodged a formal complaint with the ARB, claiming that Ster-Kinekor Morvies Club misleading advertising had created false expectations.
Ster-Kinekor’s response
In its defence, Ster-Kinekor said all marketing materials included a “T&Cs apply” disclaimer. The company argued that full terms and conditions were accessible on its website, where exclusions and the subscription lock-in were clearly stated. Screenshots were provided to the ARB to support this.
Ster-Kinekor also noted that the complainant’s cancellation request, although falling within the three-month lock-in period, had been honoured as an exception. The cinema chain explained that space limitations in posters, social media, and app banners prevented detailed disclosures upfront.
The ARB verdict
The ARB examined the ad from the perspective of an ordinary consumer. Clause 4.2.1 of Section II of the Code of Advertising Practice prohibits misleading claims by omission, ambiguity, or exaggeration.
The Board found that the claim of “bottomless movie tickets per month” created a reasonable expectation that all formats were included. Excluding IMAX and Cinema Prestige, central to the Ster-Kinekor cinema experience, was a material omission.
While the terms and conditions were accessible via a website footer, the ARB ruled that this was insufficient. A simple asterisk or “T&Cs apply” next to the claim would have given customers a clear warning. The Board concluded that Ster-Kinekor Morvies Club misleading advertising had indeed occurred and instructed the company to amend its promotional materials.
Why This Matters to Consumers
This is more than just a complaint about movie tickets. For many South Africans, spending R399 a month is a meaningful choice. Families plan outings, students budget allowances, and movie-goers expect value for money. When “unlimited” is restricted by hidden conditions, disappointment follows.
This ruling also highlights a broader problem: fine-print advertising. From “unlimited data” mobile plans to supermarket specials, consumers often encounter hidden conditions that dramatically change the offer. The ARB decision validates the frustration many feel when advertising promises don’t match reality.
What happens next
Ster-Kinekor has been ordered to revise its advertising so that material exclusions are clear. Whether that means removing the word “unlimited” or adding prominent disclaimers is yet to be determined.
For consumers, the case is a reminder that their complaints matter. And for brands, it’s a clear lesson: marketing may win attention, but transparency wins trust.
Conviction.co.za
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
