Exhibitors Herald (1927)

August 13, 1927 EXHIBITORS HERALD 41 Further Protection Hits Snag {Continued from page 13) atres are protected for 60 days against the outlying houses. Reports from Omaha, where Publix is the only interest handling protection, disclose no change as yet in the 3-week arrangement. In Atlanta and Denver no attempts have been thus far made to extend the prevailing period. Exhibitors Oppose West Coast Proposal (Special to the Herald) HOLLYWOOD, Aug. 9.— Local theatre owners have gone on record as opposed to the recently proposed new clearance zoning for theatres. Several meetings have been held and a committee consisting of Messrs. Harper, Yost, Seiler, Lazarus, Whitson, Michaelstetter and Manney called upon West Coast Theatres officials and asked for a modification of the clearance measure. Harold B. Franklin, president of the theatre chain, listened to the committee but would make no statement as to what his company would do about it at the time. He has now issued the following statement concerning the proper amount of protection to be given theatres charging the higher admission prices: “Proper clearance for each grade of motion picture theatre is essential if successful exhibition is to be maintained. Every exhibitor who is fair must in the final analysis approve of the idea that the theatres that charge high prices of admission are entitled to proper clearance over those theatres that charge less. Anyone who thinks otherwise is looking for a personal advantage at the expense of his fellow-exhibitor, v/ho bears the burden of higher film rentals. Is it fair to expect a IS-cent house to run pictures at the same time or close on the heels oi the house that has a 2S-cent admission? And this applies all along up the line. The fellow who is looking for a free ride is never the one who contributes anything that is constructive. “Film rental is determined by gross business, and gross business Ss determined by the admission charged, and the exhibitor who pays the higher film rental is entitled to protection. If he doesn’t get it, eventually he cannot continue to pay big_ film rentals because his admission prices cannot continue in the face of unfair competition. And when exhibitors cannot continue to pay big film rentals, producers cannot spend the money to make big pictures, and when that time comes the public will begin to lose interest in motion pictures and all will suffer. “There can be no question that it is unfair to support the IS-cent and 2S-cent store show at the expense of the exhibitor who is trying to build a constructive business by showing pictures in an elegant environment and making possible a higher admission scale. The progress in the exhibition end of the industry was made by those who built better theatres and not by pulling the level of the business down to the store show. The biggest motion picture patronage was built through fine, big theatres, service, quality and admission prices. “During the past year more IS-cent houses have crept up in _ Los Angeles County, than at any previous time. Is that fair or constructive? The reason for this is because theatres charging advanced prices received no, or insufficient clearance, and this resulted in bringing many theatres down to 15-cent admissions so as to meet the unfair competition. This results in poor grosses for exhibitors and eventually low rentals for distributors. Is that going to lead the business anywhere? Those who have studied the situation know that the clearance plan now proposed is the most constructive move made in the city, and which will benefit every progressive exhibitor. West Coast Theatres are not asking for any special consideration. Every West Coast theatre will be classified on clearance according to admission price, on the same footing and basis of every other exhibitor. We have never asked, nor would we expect any special privileges, but we do want to help to build a business that all in the industry may be proud of, and which will reflect progress and success for every rightminded exhibitor. “I understand that some of the exhibitors are opposed to change in the present plan, excepting as it effects theatres charging 20 cents or less. If it’s right for 2S-cent theatres to get clearance, why isn’t it right for 50-cent, 40-cent, 35-cent and 30-cent theatres to receive proper protection? Why discriminate? “At a recent meeting the writer had with a committee from the M. P. T. O. of America, not one argument was raised against the clearance plan, excepting by a 15-cent exhibitor, who bad an axe to grind, and by another exhibitor who, although located in Los Angeles proper, was subject to no clearance because his theatre was classified as being out of the city, and this clearance plan would put him where he properly belonged. Let us build and not tear down! And we cannot build if we do not protect, by proper clearance, those theatres that are paying over 75 per cent of the film bill — ■ and they can continue to pay such prices only by maintaining fair admission prices !’’ In the meantime the independent theatre owners have agreed among themselves that they will not do any buying from any organization who submits to the proposed measure until it has been modified to terms which they deem fair and^ equitable. Plan in Disfavor in Albany District ALBANY,. Aug. 9. — The dozen or more film exchanges in Albany, N. Y., serving something over 450 motion picture theatres, will oppose any movement on the part of the theatre chains in the territory served for longer than a thirtyday protection. This statement was rnade on Albany’s Film Row by practically every exchange manager. This thirty-day protection has been the rule in this part of New York state for some time past. Heads of large chains, such as the Schine circuit of over 130 theatres, demanding longer protection, will find themselves curtailed in their efforts. The movement, which is now on along the West Coast, and which, according to word that has reached Albany, has entered Chicago, was. branded this week by_ Albany’s film exchange managers as being little short of ridiculous and decidedly unreasonable. “We are not going over the 30-day protection,” said one prominent film exchange manager in Albany. “We are holding to the 30-day protection for firstruns over subsequent-runs and a sevenday protection on subsequent-runs over immediate opposition. There will be no deviation from this, although I am frank in saying that the protection demanded by the Schine interests in many places will be cut in half.” A demand for longer protection was brought up last week by Guy Graves, one of the managing directors of the Farash chain in Schenectady, and a veteran in the business. The proposition was advanced by Mr. Graves, but was immediately sat upon by the Albany exchange to which the proposition was made. Some of Albany’s film exchange managers declared this week that the Schine circuit would protect its houses through the entire Mohawk valley over an unreasonable period, if the heads of the circuit had their own way. For instance, there is a 30-day protection for Oneonta over Cooperstown, two places but a short distance away, and a protection which some of the exchange managers declare is entirely without rhyme or reason. On the other hand, protection is demanded in Ogdensburg over Chateaugay, so far distant from each other that there is not the slightest chance of one house drawing patronage from the other because of an earlier playing date. Proposes Rider in Contract “We will put a rider in the clause in the contract governing playing dates,” said one exchange manager, “to the effect that if a picture protected is not played within a reasonable time, all protection will be off. The heads of the big chains in New York state are not going to run our exchanges. We have still something to say about the pictures to be played. The whole proposition sums itself up by having the bigger houses squeeze out the little ones and we believe that the little fellow is entitled to protection and assistance. “The big chains, by the recent booking arrangements, through acquiring an interest, either financial or imaginary, in other houses, are attempting to dictate not only prices to be paid for film, but also as to protection. The film exchanges of Albany will make a fight to the finish against any attempt to extend the 30-day protection and we are united in the matter.” A year or so ago, an effort was made in this section, or perhaps it should be said in cities south of here, to secure a 60-day protection, but the movement fell flat. Film exchanges in Albany are confronted with a serious situation. Up until a week or two ago, very few pictures were being booked of new product by exhibitors. The break came about two weeks ago and several of the exchanges announced during the past week that they were set in the key cities of the state for the new product. Along with this has come the movement on the part of chains to acquire some interest in other houses toward a booking arrangement that will enable these chains to secure their pictures at lower prices. Now comes the demand on the part of the chains for a longer protection. Albany exchanges declared today that it was a fight to a finish and that the New York city offices would back them to the limit against any concession for a longer protection than the one now being given.