Exhibitors Herald and Moving Picture World (Oct-Dec 1928)

98 BETTER THEATRES SECTION OF October 27, 1928 How to Save 50 Per Cent IN INSURANCE By ERNEST A. ROVELSTAD WOULD you be interested in saving three-fourths of your insurance cost? Of course you would, and it can be done. What is more, it will give you the wholesome feeling that you are giving your patrons the utmost of safety against fire injury and loss. In the September 1 issue of "Better Theatres" we showed how insurance cost can be cut in half for the owner of a small neighborhood theatre with a small stage and a limited amount of fixed scenery. In this article we consider the fairly old theatre with complete theatrical equipment and seating about one thousand. The theatre which is the subject of this discussion has brick exterior walls with ordinary wood joisted floors and roof. The theatre occupies the entire building except two small shops on the ground floor, and has full stage paraphernalia. The rate of this theatre can be cut onefourth by certain changes to be described hereinafter. Truly enough, this presumes the installation of an automatic sprinkler system to protect the stage section. Even without that improvement, however, the cost can be reduced more than one-half, and this for comparatively inexpensive changes. • * + Too much emphasis cannot be placed on the fact that insurance rates actually are reduced by simple care in the conduct of a theatre and by simple and almost costless alterations in the building as well as better equipment. Conversations with several theatre owners attending the M P T O A convention at Toronto last week revealed the rather startling information that several did not believe that the removal of rubbish, which would be a commonsense act of protection and ordinary housecleaning regardless of any money saving, would cut down the rate of insurance. As a matter of fact, it is one-fourteenth of the cost. A. F. Hancock, vice-president of the Cosmopolitan Fire Insurance Company, newly organized to specialize in theatre insurance, told the convention something that explains the foregoing and at the same time should be revealing to the skeptic. Hancock declared that the insurance companies make their profits on low rate insurance rather than high rate. In other words, the insurance companies themselves prefer, from purely a business standpoint, that a theatre be as fully protected as possible, or to state it in another form, that the theatre be so protected that it pays a low rate. One reason for that is obvious: there is less risk for the insurance company in the best constructed and equipped theatre. After the required changes listed in the following arc made, the savings to the theatre owner in the cost of his building insurance to him are: Instead of an annual cost of $21 annually for each $1,000 of insurance he will need pay only $10.10, a saving of $10.90, or more than one-half. If he uses a standard steel curtain the cost will be still further reduced to $9.46. If in addition the stage section Sfage Floor A rigid theatre curtain, designed to resist a severe stage fire and recommended by the National Board of Fire Underwriters, is diagrammed above. It is planned to prevent entirely the passage of flame from the stage section to the auditorium, and to reduce to a minimum the passage of smoke. were protected by an approved system of automatic sprinklers, the cost will be cut down to $6.00. A theatre of the modern type of socalled fire-resistive construction, otherwise similar to that described in the introduction to this article, would bear an approximate annual rate of only $2.00 on each $1,000 of insurance, after completion of improvements, including protection of the stage section by automatic sprinklers. How should the theatre owner go about obtaining the information upon which to save himself the money he has been paying out for high-rate insurance? We are listing herewith a dozen items often overlooked by theatre owners as means of saving them selves cash. These are based upon the example assumed at the outset of this article. It is emphasized, however, that these cases may not fit the particular theatre; they arc rather a clue or a guide. Property owners should always consult their local rating authorities to determine the schedule upon which their insurance is based. Theatre owners can obtain free advice from the rating experts for the asking; indeed, requests for such advice are urged. The case of the small neighborhood theatre, discussed in the September 1 issue, and the instance of the 1,000-seat house which is the subject of this article, arc based on the rating schedule called the Analytic System, popularly called the Dean Schedule. It is to be noted that the Analytic System is not used in all states. It is employed, however, in the Midwestern Territory and in Cook County. The Midwestern Territory is under the jurisdiction of the Western Actuarial Bureau, and includes Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Colorado and Wyoming. In addition, the system is used in Arkansas and West Virginia under a copyright agreement, though the bureau does not have direct jurisdiction in those two states. The New England states of Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island also use the Analytic System, though the case is somewhat different and they really are under the Eastern jurisdiction. So, too, Cook county in Illinois, which includes Chicago, has adopted the system but it has its own organization separate from the Western Actuarial Bureau. The Analytic System was originated in 1902 and is under continual revision. It is copyrighted. • * « In other states different systems apply. Each state has its own schedule. Some use class rates, and in some there is only guesswork in the rating of theatre insurance. That is why a theatre owner or his architect should consult with the local rating authorities in all cases. It is to be noted that in the contents insurance, which as noted in the September 1 article, is usually written separately from the building insurance, a corresponding saving can be effected. If the changes to be listed hereinafter are made, the exhibitor will pay only $11.45 instead of $28.70, a saving of $17.25 or more than one-half. If he uses an approved sprinkler system to protect the stage section he need pay only $12.50. If the theatre is of modern type with socalled fire-resistive construction, and with automatic sprinklers, the annual rate for contents would approximate $5 for each $1,000 of insurance. Now to get down to the eleven items on which savings can be made without taking into consideration the one-fifth reduction which the use of automatic sprinklers alone would bring. It is to be noted also that most of these methods of saving are required under building codes. Rating authorities prefer that a steel curtain be used, and in connection with the item regarding asbestos curtains it should be added that a credit of $1.32 would he permitted for using the steel type. Asbestos curtains, these authorities declare, serve to retard the spread of a fire in tinstage section to the auditorium while their particular value is in preventing panics by screening the smoke and flames from the audience. • A diagram of a rigid curtain and sketches of how to attach asbestos roll smoke seals, as recommended by the National Board of