Exhibitors Herald (Jun-Sep 1924)

38 EXHIBITORS HERALD August 16, 1924 “One of the tnoist interesting motion picture conferences ever held,** is what they are saying about the Warner Brothers “exhibitor conventions.** In this group taken during the Cleveland meeting are: Front row, kneeling — J. D. Godhar, Frank G. Hard, S«im Warner, Harry Chamas, Sam Morris, George I. Matthews, Harry Brown. First Row, standing — Fred Scheurman, James E, Finch, John Best, L. Padolf, Austin Interrante, Bert Stem, H. R. Hunter, M. L. Koppelman, Pearl Keating, James V. Allen, R. E, Caskey, C. A. Weinberg, Max Yoiuig, Walter Freudenberger and W. A. Kent. Back row — Raoul Cleaver, R. S. Moran, ChcU'les Perry, George Erdman and Jack 0*Connell. Are You Booking in Blocks? We Are, Says Warner Tells Kansas and Missouri Exhibitors Reason for Policy at Kansas City Get-together {Special to Exhibitors Herald) Kansas city, mo., August S. — There have been many exhibitor conventions in Kansas City, but it is doubtful if there ever has been a meeting where each guest was made to feel more “at home” than at the Warner Brothers’ banquet at the Hotel Muehlebach last week. About seventy-five exhibitors of Missouri and Kansas, the Kansas State Censor Board and Warner Brothers officials attended, including S. L., Warner, S. E. Morris, general manager of production; Mrs. Pearl Keating, scenario editor, and A1 and M. A. Kahn of the Warner Brothers’ Kansas City exchange. A TENSE moment was wedged into an otherwise jovial affair when, at the conclusion of Mr. Warner’s talk, "Bones” Smith, secretary of the M. P. T. O. Kansas, arose from his table and put the following question to Mr. Warner: “Does your company intend to book its produce in blocks?” The Kansas body, along with the Allied State Organizations, has taken a decided stand against block booking. "Yes, we do,” quickly replied Mr. Warner. “No company or any exhibitor can do business on a monthly basis. It is true we get some bad pictures, but we also get good ones, and we must cover up our losses by our profits. It is a matter of a year’s business and must be conducted as such. In the course of a year there will be several costume pictures, which cost a great deal to produce, but which will not be so good as box office attractions. As an ever necessary element of variety these type of pictures are necessary, however. On the other hand, pictures of a lighter vein, which do not cost so much to produce, will swell the box office receipts. We must make the season’s program balance, both in money and tj'pe of entertainment.” .^mong those who attended the meeting were; Frank L. Newman. Kansas City: Milton H. Feld, Kansas City; R. R. Biechele, Kansas City, Kan., who acted as toastmaster; A. M. Eisner. Kansas City; Edward Frazier, Pittsburg, Kan.; M. J. Kirkman, Hays, Kan.; L. Stutter, Kansas City; “Bones" Smith. Kansas City, Kan.; S. Nastur, Kansas City, Kan.; E. Garstine. Peabody, Kan.; Lee Balderston. Pratt, Kan.; Fred Meyn, Kansas City, Kan.; Dick Liggett, Kansas City, Kan.; M. B. Shanberg, Salina, Kan.; B. Schultz, Kansas City; Mr. and Mrs. L. Salzberg, Independence, Mo.; Jack Roth, Kansas City; William Parsons, Joplin, Mo.; Charles Godell, Ottawa, Kan.; Lawrence Brenninger, Topeka, Kan.; Edward Peskay, St. Joseph, Mo.; William Renke, St. Joseph, Mo.; Gerald Akers, district manager of Universal; H. Hollander, L’niversal Kansas City branch manager; Charles German, Bonner Springs, Kan.; Phil Ryan, Kansas City; Dave Harding, Kansas City. Good Will Created at Warner Gatherings (Special to Exhibitors Herald) DES MOINES, lA.. August 5.— The visit of the Warner Brothers’ executives — S. L. Warner, Sam Morris, general sales manager, and Mrs. Pearl Keating, editor in chief of the scenario department in Des Moines, on Friday, July 25, was made the occasion of one of the most interesting motion picture conferences ever held in this territory, and one from which a maximum of good will and valuable publicity was obtained throughout the state. These executives of the Warner Brothers’ company are making a transcontinental tour of the United States and Canada, visiting only the key cities, in the interests of their product for the season 1924-25, and with the even more important hope of obtaining new and enlightening viewpoints on the demands of the motion picture public in every part of the country. To make their visit in Des Moines as interesting as possible, H. M. Weinberg, general manager of A. H. Blank Theatrical Enterprises, put forth every effort to bring to the city all interested representatives of the distribution, exhibition and publicity angles in Iowa. Group and Individual Booking Is Analyzed by Nation *s Showmen (Continued from page ^5) select my own pictures according to public demand.” Stanley D. Swartz, Dorlyn theatre, Brodhead, Wis., in expressing a preference for individual booking “in most cases,” says that “the principal glaring fault in the distribution of the motion picture industry today is the fact that the exhibitors (especially the small fellow) has to take the junk in order to get what his patrons really want.” Like a number of others, E. V. Richards, vice president and general manager of Saenger Amusement Company, New Orleans, La., is emphatic in opposition to booking other than individually. “We have always been opposed to the block booking plan,” declare Hay & Nicholas, Strand theatre, Fairmont, Minn. “We have proved so many times that pictures which break house records in some towns in our territory not only fail to get business for us, but positively injure us. We ought to be allowed to decide for ourselves whether we shall pay for pictures which we know will fail to satisfy our people. In no other business is it more true that what is one man’s meat is another man’s poison, and we claim the right to avoid the poison when we know it to be poison.” Number of Films Wanted In supporting the buying of pictures in blocks of from twelve to twenty-six, Charles Martina, Family theatre, Mt. Morris, N. Y., says: “The reason I think it is better for a small town exhibitor to buy in a group is that a salesman’s time is worth money and if only one picture is sold or a few they usually see that the price is high enough over the minimum that the exhibitor pays more money for same than he really can afford.” “Trying to sell you something you don’t want,” is W. E. Patterson’s reason for opposing block booking. The Hettick, Ilk, exhibitor holds that “pictures should be sold on their merits.” “If I want one, or fifty,” he says, “why should they try to force me to take something I don’t want ?” O. W. Johnson, Roberts theatre, Roberts, Idaho, favors both plans, with twelve to fifteen pictures comprising a block. D. A. Kooker, Happy Hour theatre, Ewen, Mich., however, would book “each picture on its merits.” See before hooking is the policy of B. F. Huestis, Community theatre. Harbor Beach, Mich., who believes in booking each picture individually. Sam CarIon, Strand theatre, Frankfort, Ind., would buy part of his pictures in groups and part individually. When in blocks he does not care to book more than four to six subjects. Arnold Weslow, Royal theatre, Kenton, O., asks: “Why should an exhibitor be compelled to take all of a product when he can use only a part of it?” Believing that the best results can be obtained by booking both in groups and individually, Morgan Van Doom, Colonial theatre, Marion, N. Y., says that “for a small town like this running only one night a week I find it hard to run the pictures I would like to when they insist upon my taking from ten to fifteen pictures at one time.” Location of theatre in many instances seems to govern the booking policy favored by the exhibitor. In a competitive town, block booking finds support, whereas in towns controlled by one company a preference is expressed for individual booking.