Associated First National Franchise (1921)

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.

6 First National Franchise Semi Monthly Mannen Claims Franchise Exaggerated Gets $30 RewardBut a Glance at the Ads Shows We Only Improved Them TITHEN is an exaggeration an improvement? * V Answer: When it shows the exhibitor how he can improve his advertising or his publicity in such a way that it will mean more money at his box office and more satisfaction to himself. It is costing us just $30 to give you the answer to the above question, but it's worth it — every cent of it— and many additional dollars. In fact, for such a publication as "Franchise," which has the interests of 9,000 exhibitors at heart, a mere $30 is a drop in the bucket when there is so much good which can be accomplished by merely calling attention to a particular fact. K. L. Mannen of the Greater Theatres Company, Liberty Theatre Building," Seattle, Washington, declares that we exaggerated on page 13, of the issue of "Franchise" of March 15th, when we reproduced three advertisements after inserting the First National trademark, which had originally been left out. Two of these ads were for the Coliseum Theatre and advertised "The Scoffer" and "Mamma's Affair." The third ad was for the Libertv and advertised Charlie Chaplin in "The Kid." None of the three had the First National trademark when it was originally published in the Seattle papers. All reference to the fact that these pictures were First National Attractions was carried in type matter in the three ads. In reproducing them in our department, putting the ad in advertising, the Editor of "Franchise" inserted the trademark in each one, thereby improving the ads, in our estimation, to a great extent. To illustrate this fact, we are printing on this page, the cut of the Coliseum Theatre advertising "The Scoffer" before the trademark was inserted, and the cut we published in the AFTER— Note the improvement March 15th issue, after the trademark was inserted. By looking at the two ads and comparing them, it will be easily seen the added value of a trademark in advertising, regardless of what the attraction may be. However, the fact that we consider the addition of the trademark an improvement instead of an exaggeration, does not keep us from mailing the check for $30 to Mr. Mannen, for the reason stated above — that we consider it well spent and worth much more than that to all First National exhibitors. Our reply to Mr. Mannen will be noted in the second column of this page. Let us here take the opportunity to repeat our offer of $10 reward for every direct lie or exaggeration found in the columns of "Franchise." This offer is bonafide and we will pay it every time there is a lie or exaggeration found. "Franchise" has no other purpose than to be of service to the exhibitor, in addition to giving him the news that is of interest, and the only Our Reply! Mr. K. L. Mannen, Greater Theatres Company, Liberty Theatre Building, Seattle, Washington. Dear Mr. Mannen: We are pleased to enclose herewith our check for $30 in payment of your claim for three exaggerations in the reproductions of your Liberty and Coliseum Theatre advertisements, which we reproduced recently in "Franchise." We doubt that a jury would award you the damages because of the addition of the trade mark, which meant the final touch of excellence to your ad and is, we believe, an improvement and not an exaggeration or misrepresentation. The trade mark should have been in the ads, but as you overlooked it, we put it in for you. However, we consider $30 well spent, as we think the reproduction of your ads with the trade mark cut added should sell you on the idea that the trade mark cuts do not hurt the ads at all and, in fact, improve them. We sincerely hope to see them in all your future ads, as we like to reproduce your stuff in "Franchise," and we just can't do it if you leave the trade mark cuts out. With best wishes, Yours very truly, ASSOCIATED FIRST NATIONAL PICTURES, INC. way we can do this is to deal in truth alone. Naturally, telegrams, letters, or articles of such nature, which quote individuals, do not come under the reward heading, as the individuals themselves will be responsible for what they write, telegraph or say. On page 9 of this issue, you will note another page layout of advertising. Some of these were formerly without the trademark, which has been added to show how they can be improved. There is no exaggeration in any way. What is YOUR opinion concerning the trademark in advertising? Drop the editor a line while we are on the subject and let us decide whether ads should or should not have trademarks. Washington Associated Shows Worth of Exhibitor Cooperation The practical effectiveness of exhibitors' cooperative bodies, as exemplified in the subfranchise plan of Associated First National Pictures which is now in operation in nearly every section of the country, was demonstrated once again at the first regular meeting of the Washington, D. C, organization in the national capital Friday, March 25th. The meeting was held primarily to bring about a working organization through the election of officers, a board of directors and an advisory committee of sub-franchise holders to confer with the directors on the problems of the theatres in the territory. Marked enthusiasm reigned at the luncheon which preceded the business session and was carried through the elections and the discussion of organization problems which followed. Guy L. Wonders and Thomas Goldberg, both prominent Baltimore exhibitors, and leaders in Maryland theatrical affairs, made stirring addresses, bringing home to their fellow exhibitors the advantages of the sub-franchise policy for their theatres. E. Bruce Johnson, head of the legal department of the home office, attended the meeting and spoke to the members on First National policies and pictures. The balloting at the close of the luncheon resulted in the election of Harry M. Crandall as president of the organization ; Guy L. Wonders of Baltimore, vice-president, and Fritz D. Hoffman, secretary and treasurer. The directors elected were : Guy L. Wonders, Frank H. Durkes, William C. Murphy, Fritz D. Hoffman, Harry M. Crandall, Joseph Morgan and James P. Anderson. Theatres Change Hands The Saxe. Dayton Company, it is announced, has purchased from the Charles Pacini Estate in Kenosha, Wisconsin, three theatres, the Majestic, the Butterfly and the Strand, which show First National Attractions. With this sale went a building site for another theatre, which the new owners plan to build in the near future. The Fitzpatrick and McElroy Company has also secured a ninety-year lease in Kenosha on the Rhode Opera House, upon which site a new house costing $450,000 will be erected.