Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1957)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

PEACE, TOO, CAN BE KELL. The columns upon columns of figures cried out the expected name: Joseph Vogel — in a near landslide. Thus, in the hours of early evening October 15, did a harried proxy clerk unfurl his tally tape to proclaim the mandate which meant that over the next four months at least, the fate of Loew s, Inc. shall be in the hands of a single, undisputed master. Embattled President Vogel had successfully concluded his private 12 month war with aggressive, ill-counseled Joseph Tomlinson. He had accomplished this feat with a shot and shell that has all but rendered Mr. Tomlinson bors de combat from any future obstructionist action or grab for control. But at the same time, there are observers who contend that for all the Vogel skill at arms the Loew's leader has earned himself a one-way ticket to corporate purgatory. This has been a curious contest throughout. But no more puzzling than the disquieting peace which has now descended upon Loew's like the sole of a hobnail boot. Mr. Vogel has won the honors. He wins precious little else. In the end, his may go down as a victory without spoils. Only his indomitable courage and refusal to fail may prevent this. A stock-taking of the battlefield casualties leads to the unmistakable conclusion that Mr. Tomlinson is not the drama's only ill-starred Joe. While the Canadian's losses are open, circumscribed and material, Vogel's are not so easy to define. Tomlinson loses power. Vogel gains a scalding hot seat. Given the power to govern his company, the pressure on Joe Vogel thus builds and builds and builds. 0 The rub from the Vogel standpoint is that there is so much to do and so little time. So little time, that is, between the present and February, 1958, date of the annual Loew's shareholder gathering, when it is suspected that new and bolder forces may begin agitations anew. If Vogel has disposed of a primary obstacle, than another less discernible, more imposing threat has sprung up to etch deeper into the frown line. It is a muted threat, draped in respectability and not readily open to challenge. It will take more than Vogel's long-admired Spartan rigidity to beat down this storm should it cloud up about him. Portents have already risen that Joe Vogel may next have to battle Wall Street itself — at least an imposing hunk of that community, the brokerages of Lehman Bros, and Lazard Freres, and, possibly, several more. Wall Street sources close to Financial Bulletin are exact in stressing that this potential antiVogel bloc is spiritually unaffiliated with Tomlinson, Stanley Meyer and others of that crowd. The Lehman-Lazard axis likes to view itself as a patient policeman conducting a fair surveillance of company operations, as its due by virtue of controlling a massive swad of stock (although not close to the 3 million out of a total of 5.3 million shares that Time Magazine, October 28, reports). In casting for Samuel Briskin as a company director, the two financial houses may be construed as hurling criticism at Joe Vogel as well as his "show-case" slate. It is erroneous to label this move as support of Tomlinson or any of the vague objectives he stood for. It must be construed, rather, as a denunciation of too few movie veterans on the board. FINANCIAL BULLETIN OCTOBER 28. 1957 By Pbilip R. Ward This development should come as no surprise to Financial Bulletin followers who have been repeatedly cautioned of unfriendly Wall Street stirrings. The prospective liquidation of the company is still a prime behind-the-scenes factor. The protection and preservation of equity is a subject on which hardplated investment firms show one-track minds. Evidence now exists that as a result of the debilitating proxy contest, as well as unpromising conditions obtaining in the movie industry generally, the future does not bode bright for Loew's. A further depreciation in market value may force Wall Street hands. Mr. Vogel knows this well. To a certain extent he is fortified by a backlog of reportedly superior films spawned under his leadership. Income from the lease of the Metro library to TV, though helpful, cannot carry the whole load. Income deriving purely from theatre film commerce is lagging, and the key issue is not how much will this division earn but to how small a point can the loss be held. From the standpoint of the immediate future the prospects at Loew's, both marketwise and income-wise, loom as bleak as the surface of the moon. And they may well get worse before they get better. And now come an even deeper problem. A genuine scare is prevalent that wholesale dumping of stock may soon take place. Mr. Tomlinson owes a whopping $1.1 million on Loew's shares. His paper loss now extends to a reported Si. 5 million. He may soon have to answer a call on his loan. His alternative is to surrender collateral of a separate nature or unload Loew's to set straight the books. Based upon his most recent comments, Tomlinson may take the position that further retention of his huge Loew's portfolio is tantamount to tossing good money after bad. Plainly the man is disenchanted. Then again, the unsuspected downswing in stocks at large has placed other Loew's stockholders in a peculiar position. As with Tomlinson, their loans must be covered. Thus, many others, sadly, reluctantly, may be forced into selling out portions of their holdings. 0 Joseph Vogel, then, in the full bloom of victory finds little surcease from the battle he has been through in the past 8 months or so. He has won a victory and inherited a tiger by the tail. Joe Vogel is today, title-holder to filmdom's least envied chair. He is also, without a moment's deliberation, the best man for the job. One can only hope that good judgment will prevail upon those impatient banking forces cited earlier to appreciate his groaning burden and persevere with his efforts to resurrect Loew's, Inc. The bankers must allow him an unobstructed period of reasonable length to prove his merit, or find the answer to their 64 million dollar question: Where do they go wit bout Joe Vogel? Page 6 Film BULLETIN October 28, 1957