MoviePass, MovieCrash

So MoviePass was supposed to evolve into something more like a profitable loyalty card -- AFTER enough market share was captured to have "clout" with the studios and theater chains. At least this was the initial claim (but eventually the employees knew it would never happen). So I have some questions.

1) Why SHOULD everyone pay a flat rate? Shouldn't people who see more movies pay more? You can counter with examples of streaming services, but their business model is more conducive to flat-rate subscriptions (e.g., they don't maintain physical theaters).

2) What was the "secret sauce" that would prevent a competitor from stealing their idea? What exactly was MoviePass bringing to the table OTHER than an arguably interesting vision?

3) Why was losing ANY money considered OK, given pundits kept questioning the business model?

4) Why was subsidizing theater ticket purchases considered a success and/or "disruption"? Wouldn't throwing money at people in other ways cause other "disruptions"?

5) Why didn't employees quit when things got out of hand?

There are interesting elements to the story, so I'm giving this five stars despite the poor pacing and lingering questions.