Boxoffice (Oct-Dec 1962)

THE NATIONAL FILM WEEKLY Published in Nine Sectional Editions I BEN SHLYEN Editor-in-Chief and Publisher DONALD M. MERSEREAU, Associate Publisher & General Manager JESSE SHLYEN . . . .Managing Editor HUGH FRAZE Field Editor AL STEEN Eastern Editor CHRIS DUTRA Western Editor I. L THATCHER. .. Equipment Editor MORRIS SCHLOZMAN Business Mgr. Publication Offices: 825 Van Brunt Blvd. Kansas City 24, Mo. Jesse SbJyen. Managing Editor; Morris Scnlozman, Business .Manager; Hugh Kraze, Kield Editor; 1. L. lliatciier. Editor The Modern Theatre Section. Telephone CHestnut 1-7777. Editorial Offices: 1270 Sixth Ave., Rockefeller Center, New York 20, N. Donald .M. Mersereau, Associate Publisher & ileneral Manager; A1 Steen, Eastern Editor. Telephone COlumbus 5-6370. Central Offices: Editorial — 920 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago 11, 111., Frances B. Clow, Telephone superior 7-3972. Advertising— 5809 North Lincoln, Louis Didler and Jack Broderick, Telephone LUngbeach 1-5284. Western Offices: Editorial and Film Advertising— 6362 Hollywood Blvd., Hollywood 28, Cal., Chris Uutra, manager. Telephone Hollywood 5-1186. Equipment and Non-Film Advertising — New York Life Bldg., 2801 West Sixtb St., Los Angeles 57, Calif. Bob W'ettstein, manager. Telephone Dunkirk 8-2286. London Office: Anthony Gruner, 1 Woodberry Way, Finchley, No. 12. Telephone Hillside 6733. The MODERN THEATRE Section is included in the first issue of each month. Atlanta: Jean Mullis, P. 0. Box 1695. iVlbany: J. S. Conners, 140 State St. Baltimore: George Browning, 119 E. 25th St. Boston: Guy Livingston, 80 Boylston, Boston, Mass. Charlotte: Blanche Carr, 301 S. Church. Cinciiuiati: Frances Hanford, UNiversity 17180. Cleveland: W. Ward Marsh, Plain Dealer. Columbus: Fred Oestreicber, 52 V4 W. North Broadway. Dallas: Mable Guinan, 5927 Winton. Denver: Bruce Marshall, 2881 S. Cherry Way. Des Moines: Pat Cooney, 2727 49tb St. Detroit: H. F. Reves, 906 Fox llieatre Bldg., woodward 2-1144. Hartford: Allen M. Wldem, CH. 9-8211. Indianapolis: Norma Gera^ty, 436 N. Illinois St. Jacksonville: Robert Cornwall, 1199 Edgewood Ave. Memphis: Null Adams, 707 Spring St. Miami: Martha Lummus, 622 N.E. 98 St. .Milwaukee: Wm. Nlchol. 2251 S. Layton. Minneapolis: Paul Nelson, 3220 Park Ave. 8. New Orleans: .Mrs. Jack Auslet, 2268V^ St. Claude Ave. Oklahoma City: Sam Brunk, 3416 N. Virginia. Omaha: ining Baker, 5108 Izard St. Philadelphia: Al Ziirawskl, The Bulletin. Pittsburgh: R. F. Kllngensmith. 516 Jeanette, Wllkinsburg. CHurchUI 1-2809. Portland, Ore.: Arnold Marks, Journal. Providence: Guy Langley, 388 Sayles St. St. Louis: Joe & Joan Pollack, 7335 Shaftsbury, University City, I’ A 5-7181. Salt Lake City: H. Pearson, Deseret News. San Francisco: Dolores Barusch, 25 Taylor St., ORdway 3-4813; Advertising; Jerry Nowell, 417 Market St., YUkon 29537. Washington; Virginia R. Collier, 2308 Ashmead Place, N. W., DUpont 7-0892. In Canada .Montreal: Room 314, 625 Belmont St., Jules Larochelle. St. John: 43 Waterloo, Sam Babb. Toronto: 2675 Bayvlew Ave., Wlllowdale, Ont. W. Gladlsh. Vancouver: 411 Lyric Theatre Bldg. 751 OranvUle St., Jack Droy. Winnipeg: The Tribune, Jim Peters. Member Audit Bureau of Circulations Second Class postage paid at Kansas City, Mo. Sectional BdiUon, J3.00 per year. National Edition, $7.50. DECEMBER 10, 1962 Vol. 82 No. 8 I % i i H i POmi FOR MORE RETURN A POINT brought out at the Allied States Ass’n convention at Cleveland, though not new, bears repeating and emphasizing: That the tendency of producer-distributors to minimize, if not disregard, the value of the rank and file of theatres is detrimental to themselves, as well as to the entire industry. Coming into evidence at frequent intervals over the years, this trend now has reached a high point of danger. Currently, it is the outgrowth of the phenomenal success of a few outstanding attractions, which, because of their high production costs, were marketed on a roadshow basis. The same thing happened in the mid-’20s, recurring at one time or another in every decade. But, with plenty of product available in those days, it had never assumed such serious proportions as now is the case. The roadshow policy, in itself, rationally applied and on a limited basis bas played an important part in upbuilding prestige values for motion pictures and reviving public interest therein to a considerable extent. But the fact that a single picture could score grosses in the multi-millions in a handful of theatres is the “villain.” For from this stemmed the thinking on the part of producer-distributors that not only fewer pictures but fewer theatres would best serve their interests. In other words, the small, subsequent-run theatres began to hold little or no value to them. So, once again, there developed the credo among sales managers that, since approximately 3,000 key theatres provided them with 80 per cent of their revenue, they didn’t need the remaining 15,000 or so. Thus, the product, which the vast majority of theatres required to keep their doors open, was sharply reduced and the problems arising, therefore, continue to mount. Not only exhibition, but every phase of this business, has been seriously affected. Were it not for the determination of the thousands of small theatre operators who truly love this business, the distributors — some of whom have not concealed that they no longer care to serve them — would have their way. And, then, these distributors would really be in trouble! For, even though they may count on 80 per cent of the income, which they allege comes from just one-sixth of the potential market, the remaining 20 per cent holds their profit, as well as a substantial portion of tbeir overhead coverage. In no other business would the makers of any product incline to show so much disregard for any segment of its customers, as the filmmakers and sellers have done. On the contrary, in other industries, the manufacturers and distributors extend every possible aid to keep their customers alive; to help them through adverse times and conditions; to retain them as customers; to make the small ones better and the big ones bigger. As was brought out on the floor at the Allied convention, the producer-distributors should take note of the revenue they are not getting when they by-pass so many theatre outlets. Instead, they should seek, not only to hold onto the volume implicit therein, but they should also exert a greater effort to increase it, while doing all that is feasible to maintain it. On the basis of their own calculations that these outlets comprise 20 per cent of the market, this represents an already existent ticket-sale volume totaling $260 million. (The U. S. total for theatre admissions in 1961 was $1,300,000,000.) And, if film rentals were only 20 per cent of the $260 million — $52 million, that is — where would production-distribution be without that income? Needless to say, it would be deep in tbe red. For the total net earnings of ALL the U. S. picture companies is well under $52 million! Another case of shortsightedness is the concentration on big pictures and big theatre outlets, which has brought about a decimation of distribution’s field salesmen. True, changing conditions and a resultant economic need has played a part. But the curtailment that has taken place, like so many other things in this business, has been carried too far. From tbe very beginning of this industry, the salesman regularly calling on exhibitors, even in the smallest of situations, was an important factor in the industry’s growth. Not only did he sell his company’s product to the exhibitor, but he also sold him on what each picture had to offer that, in turn, the exhibitor could make use of in selling the picture to his public. The loss of so many such facets of engendering exhibitor interest, enthusiasm and inspiration at the point of sale, doubtless, is being widely felt. As a possible offset to the problems arising from the product shortage and the difficulties for exhibitors to buy even that which is available, because of tbe lack of contact with salesmen, the Allied convention passed a resolution urging its members to form film-buying and booking units in every territory, or to join existing ones. This may serve a partial need, but it may be found wanting otherwise. For nothing can adequately replace direct, person-to-person, seller-buyer relations, especially where the seller is thus enabled to render a supplementary service to aid the buyer in merchandising his product. There is much more that can be said on this subject, which we hope to deal with at another time. For the present, suffice it to say that an industry grows by widening, not shrinking, its market. So, the sooner distribution makes up its mind that it wants tbe maximum, not tbe minimum, of patronage and profits and, accordingly, steps up its efforts ALL ALONG THE LINE, the sooner will this business start on the rise to the fullness of its scope.