The Bioscope (July-Aug 1914)

Tht Bioscope, JULY 2, 1914. 13 its full capacity. Thus, I have to keep more money invested than is necessary, and to handle more spades than would be necessary for the same revenue upon a better basis. There is no need, I am sure, to labour the illustration further. It is the system, however, upon which the ordinary film-renting 1s run at the present day. An ‘‘ age’’ system is in vogue which ignores practically every commonsense business principle. Is it to be wondered at that all is not well with film producers? A manufacturer in most businesses bases his charges upon the following considerations: (1) Cost of production; (2) quality; (3) demand; (4) value of the customer. The moving picture-producer, who is entirely above such common methods, substitutes an ‘‘ age’’ basis. Let us next see how the above business axioms would be applied by the moving picture producer and renter in drawing up a more equitable and sensible scale of charges. (1) A film requiring many performers, mobs, etc., or costly and different settings would be marketed at a higher rate than a film ‘nvolving but a few artistes and simple stage settings; also, since a longer film consumes more negative and positive, the charge would also be affected by this. At present the length is alone the criterion of cost—just as though an artist would compute the value of his picture at so much per square foot of canvas. The cost of canvas and frame are certainly to be taken into account, but these are comparatively trivial considerations compared to the skill of the artist and the time spent upon the picture. (2) The quality of a film is its degree of artistic photography, and also, for practical hiring purposes, its condition. The charge for a worn film should obviously be less than for a good copy. By the present scale and basis of charging this might or might not be the case. <A film in excellent condition simply through lack of use at a particular time might have depreciated, say, at the end of a month, to a renting charge of less than many other badly worn and scratched films. This is obviously absurd. (3) A film in great demand should, by reason of its merits, compensate the producer and renter for the many unsuccessful films turned out. When many customers are demanding a particular film of which there are a limited number of available copies, the hiring rate of the film should depreciate more slowly than for a film of small demand. The market demand should affect a film’s value, and not merely lapse of time. . (4) The value of a particular customer is taken into account in most businesses—and especially should this be the case with the cinema industry. The certainty of regular hiring of a definite quantity of film week by week is of enormous convenience and value to a renter, who has to give his orders many weeks in advance. Google When this definite and regular business is absent it is impossible for the renter or producer to conduct his business with any certainty of results. It becomes a pure speculation. t is thus only just that the casual erratic customer should receive less advantage than the regular and extensive hirer. Having now enunciated the main principles upon which any businesslike scale of charges must be founded, I will endeavour to outline how a scale might be devised to satisfy these principles, and to work out more fairly to the industry in general. In the first place we will keep in mind principle No. 2—(condition) and start with substituting a condition (or quality) basis for that of age. We will have, say, four classes of films, according to their condition—which will correspond to four qualities of goods. Each class will have its regular flat rate, and as long as a film remains in the same class it will always be at the same rate. For example, into Class A will go a film in new condition, the flat rate of which might, for example, be £3 per 1,000 ft. per week. After a certain number of runs, the film will be withdrawn for a short period, say, three days, for examination, and if the condition is considered still good it will be replaced in Class A, and will again be examined later. When it is considered too worn for this class it will pass to Class B, again at a flat rate, but a lower one, say £2 per 1,000 ft.; and in the same way will be examined periodically and pass on to Class C, at, say, £1 per 1,000 ft.; and finally to Class D, at ros., where it will remain until destroyed. In this way we have at once ended depreciation by lapse of time, and satisfied principle 2 (condition). Now note further, when a new film turns out to be in little demand it will pass to Class B sooner than a film in great demand; or, in other words, a film in great demand, although well worn. will remain longer in Class A at the higher rate, although by condition it would be placed in Class B. In this way we grade the charge according to the demand, i.¢.. satisfy condition 3 (demand). Again, a film that has not entailed great expense in production might be placed in a lower class than A, although offered for the first time and quite new, and thus be hired out bv customers at a lower charge, say. that of Class B or C, right from the first. Films that have involved very heavy cost might be placed in a special Class X, at a still higher flat rate than A. We have thus satisfied conditions 1, 2, 3. and there only remains 4—value of the customer. In ordinary businesses the consumer in a big way receives advantageous prices or bigger discounts. In the cinematograph industry the advantage might be in the ‘‘run” of a film. Thus,