Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1961)

REPORT FROM ETOBICOKE Squeeze on Telemeter in Canada The demand Feb. 9 by the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. and private broadcasters that pay-TV facilities and community antenna systems be brought under control of the Federal Government's Broadcasting Act has brought swift reaction from Eugene Fitzgibbons, president of Trans-Canada Telemeter, the Famous Players Canadian subsidiary now providing feevee sen ice to about 6,000 subscribers in the Toronto suburb of Etobicoke. Pay-TV should not be brought within the confines of the Broadcasting Act, as are regular television and radio, Fitzgibbons contends, because the payas-you-watch system is an extension of the movie industry not TV. He was commenting on submissions to the special committee of the House of Commons in Ottawa by the CBC and the Canadian Association of Broadcasters, an organization representing operators of private television stations. The broadcasing act specifically states that Canadian TV programs must contain a minimum Canadian content of 55 per cent. Telecasters have until April 1, 1962, to reach this minimum. Pay-TV, according to Fitzgibbons, is not broadcasting in the ordinary sense. "In fact, it is a misnomer. We prefer to call our system home theatre, because it is an etension of our regular theatre business. There is no element of broadcasting in w hat we do. Rather, we project movies to our subscribers by means of cables. Attendance at movie theatres dropped off seriously after TV came along and we are trying to recapture part of the audience we lost. About 99 per cent of our programming is made up of movies, the rest is public service features which are offered free, and a few live shows like hockey games and the recent Bob Newhart special." The T-C Telemeter head said that if pay-TV were brought under the Broadcasting Act, his company would find it impossible to comply with the Canadian content rule because Telemeter re lies almost exclusively on U.S. -made movies. The broadcasters' demand that the subscription system be controlled stems from fear of competition, Fitzgibbons declared, adding, "I don't think we're competing with TV." According to people in the TV industry, however, competition will be felt. Private TV operators feel that pay-TV will reduce their revenue and make more difficult the hiring of Canadian performers in order to meet the minimum requirement under the Act. Not all pay-TV systems stick entirely to movies either. A Montreal closedcircuit TV firm which operates on a monthly fee basis brings in a U.S. commercial station on one of its channels, a Canadian on another, and offers movies on a third. Thus far, there has been no indication of what recommendations, if any, the Commons committee would make to the Government on the suggestions of the broadcasters. WHAT DO THE FIGURES MEAN? (Continued from Page 20) the space of the theatre by renting out part of it to a restaurant; simply closing it down to cut the losses. In every instance the "solution" has the effect of cutting down the available market for the producer and distributor. Some of the producers and distributors, to their eternal credit, have been farsighted. Men like Spyros Skouras have tried to step up the supply of product; men like Joe Levine, among others, have provided magnificent promotional efforts. But we can all cite individuals and companies who have deliberately written off a large part of their interest in the theatrical film business in favor of just as much risk on the other side of the fence, in television. The import of the Commerce department's seems to be that the motion picture industry still has plenty of bounce, plenty of customers and even a fair degree of profits. But this is a review only of I960 and a prognostication of '61. While the Department can so limit its analysis, the industry itself must be more concerned w ith long-term prospects. As of now, says the report, "Although fewer feature films are being produced, the emphasis is on quality, usually resulting in longer runs at higher admission prices." Here in one sentence, we submit, is a pithy analysis of our problem, both current and long range. The longer runs are fine for a relatively few houses and hard on thousands of sub-run situations. The higher admission prices are certainly no inducement to an increase in attendance. The fewer feature films force exhibitors to do business on a bareshelf basis. One line in the report bears repeating again and again: "When a sufficient supply of good feature films were available, the boxoffice responded and receipts were up." The Department of Commerce has given us what, on its face, is a statistical report. But it is more than that. Examined closely, it is also a warning. Let us hope it is understood and heeded. SHOWMEN . . . What Are YOU Doing? Send us your advertising, publicity and exploitation campaigns — with photos — for inclusion in our What the ^hmnteh Ate bring! Film BULLETIN February 20 1941 Page 23