Exhibitors Herald (Dec 1921 - Mar 1922)

62 EXHIBITORS HERALD February 18, 1922 LETTERS From Readers A forum at which the exhibitor is invited to express his opinion on matters of current interest. Brevity adds forcefulness to any statement. Unsigned letters will not be printed. How About "Exhibitors' Week"? EXETER, N. H.— To the Editor : Well, we have had a Paramount Week, Fox Week, Goldwyn Week, and Federated Week and every other producer's week each year, year after year, and we have always fallen for it. Now why can't we have an "Exhibitors' Week," a real one? A salesman calls upon us and says such a week has been set aside as Witchcraft Film Week. If you will book this week solid with Witchcraft pictures, you will be doing him a personal favor. Then we get letters from the managers of the exchanges asking the same favor and often signed by the full office force asking this "personal favor." We fall for it as usual, although no reduction in prices is ever offered during this week. Only once in a while, a little free advertising, which does them much more good than us, as it seldom advertises anything except Withcraft Week. Then along comes another and thf another and so on and we fall for all of them to be a good fellow. Often we go to a lot of trouble in changing bookings, setting bookings back, etc., and then get the devil from ihe others for so doing. And why do wc do it? We are not going to any more. At least I am not until they show me how I can benefit at least a little bit by it. Now we have done so much for them, let's try them and see how much they are willing to do for us ! As I said in the first part of the letter, let's have an "Exhibitors' Week." Let's put it up to the exchanges; reserve a certain week and have each of the exchanges that we do business with furnish us one show that week free of charge. I'll bet Carl Laemmle will do it, but I will bet a dollar to a doughnut he is the only producer that will. I am not suggesting this because I need free pictures, as I can pay for all I get. In fact, I have always paid for more than I ever got but it would show just how much love they really have for us little fellows. We have put their weeks over for them. Now let them put one over for us. Let us see if there is any gratitude in this business. And if such a miracle should happen that any of them should agree to this, would they offer us junk? During their weeks, we did not pay for junk although we often got it. — G. W. Yeaton, manager, Ioka theatre, Exeter, N. H. Film Rentals and Percentages OMAHA, NEB.— To the Editor : There is something on my mind which I must let the world know about with your kind indulgence. These arc troublesome times, not only in the picture business but in all lines as well. I see in the clothing store windows that men's suits and overcoats v J lb**** • • J > .J* . Pauline Frederick in a scene from "Two Kinds of Women" (R-C Pictures) can be bought for half what they could a year ago. Also, the price of other commodities has been reduced. But so far some of the producers haven't found out, apparently, that times have changed for the worse in the last twelve months, and, instead of reducing film rentals in accordance with the exhibitor's ability to pay, are asking enormous a d I might say fabulous prices. I would rather not mention names, but as I see other exhibitors are telling who are the guilty ones, I suppose I will have to do the same. We have received a price quotation from United Artists recently on three of their pictures which was just five times higher than we have ever paid. Immediately after receiving these figures, we received a letter from the same company asking us if we were going to reduce our price of admission. Mr. Griffith says in the magazines that the sum he is asking for his picture is no higher than he would have received had he "road showed" it. I ask: "How does he know he would have received as much?" Besides his argument does not apply to this city, as this picture has already been shown twice in a legitimate theatre and also had a long run in one of the picture houses of Omaha. Now comes another producer with his specials and asks us to show them cn percentage, 65-35, said producer to take the 65. Up to this time, 60 per rent is the highest we have ever been asked and some have offered to let us deduct our house expenses and then split 50-50. I will give you the initials of one cf this producer's specials so that the readers of this article, if any, may have something to study over, being "O t H ." We thought we had settled the percentage question some time ago when the exhibitors of this part of the country almost unanimously declared themselves against it. The arguments against percentage have all been published time and again and are just as good today as they were at any time in the past. I for one will never show a picture under this arrangement if I have to close my theatre doors. Let us suggest my epitaph for the gravestone of the one who invented percentage as follows: Here lies old Ninety-Nine Per Cent, The more he saved, the less he spent; The more he saved, ihe more he craved. Great God! How can such a soul be saved? — W. H. Creal, Sr. Suburban theatre, Omaha, Neb. * * ♦ Establishing Longer Runs DETROIT, Mich.— To the Editor: I do not contribute to "What the Picture Did for Me" as often as most of the readers do, but I want to explain certain things and then draw your own conclusions. I have been operating the Myrtle the atre for over eight years. For years I thought I had to change daily. Not until October 1, 1919, did I show my first two-day picture, which proved a great success. From then on about once a month, I showed a two-day picture. Not until June, 1920, did I put on a two-day picture once a week regularly. By being very careful in selecting my two-day picture, it developed the two best days of the week except Sunday. My two-day picture was not always a so-called special but many were selected from the program pictures. I get to see from four to six pictures a week at the first run houses; so practically all of my two-day pictures I have seen myself before showing them. I also included the cream of the comedies with my two-day pictures with the exception of where the feature was too long. The higher priced comedies are usually sold at a fixed rental with choice of one or two days at the same rental. On November 14, 15 and 16, 1921, I took a chance and showed a picture three days for the first time. The picture was "The Old Nest." It proved the most profitable days I have ever had. Four weeks later, I showed "The Affairs of Anatol" for three days. The attendance for "Anatol" was quite satisfactory but I paid too much for the picture. The local Paramount office adjusted the price on the future big specials like "The Sheik," "Experience," "The Great Moment," etc. As a result of my experience with "The Old Nest" and "Anatol," I decided to try a threeday picture about once in three or four weeks. The last three-day picture up to writing this letter was "Wet Gold" together with Harold Lloyd in "I Do," which showed January 9, 10 and 11. Next to "The Old Nest," this last three-day showing was the most satisfactory in months. I have shown all the comedies Harold Lloyd ever made with the exception of the last four and never made any money with them until I made an extra fuss with "I Do" and "Wet Gold." The advertising I used was window cards, especially printed, about 125 cost $10, and screen announcements. My two-day picture this week averages about the same as the two-day pictures have for some time, perhaps a little better. My next three-day picture will be February 6, 7, and 8 with Mary Pickford in "Suds" and Harold Lloyd in "Never Weaken." The week following I start two pictures a week each two days, alternating with a threeday picture once in three or four weeks. It looks to me that the reduction in film rental made possible for me by the three-day showing together with the extra prestige a picture seems to get by advertising it three days will give me an extra good week at least once a month. I might add that the Myrtle theatre is located in a very quiet neighborhood, working class section, and very few transients pass the theatre. My price of admission has not been raised since 1919, being 10 cents for children, 15 cents for adults including war tax; Sunday, 10 and 20 cents; seating capacity, 600; and, considering the times, I manage to get by very nicely. I will try to report from time to time what future results will be with the three-day showings, also the new po'1^ of two two-day showings a week.— J. EStocker, manager, Myrtle theatre, 3515 Seventeenth street, Detroit, Mich.