Harrison's Reports (1946)

196 HARRISON'S REPORTS December 7, 1946 WISE WORDS AND INTERESTING INFORMATION The following excerpts are from a lengthy but interesting bulletin issued recently by Leo F. Wolcott, Chairman of the Board of Allied Independent Theatre Owners of Iowa 6? Nebraska: "This is a real sucker territory. Ample proof of this is the number of prizes won by exchanges in this area in practically every film company drive. Certainly, there is no justification for the higher and even higher terms demanded by the distributors. Their costs are up, true; but so are their profits — Paramount made $52 million, one million a week! in the last fiscal year — the excess profits taxes have been repealed and huge sums refunded to them, no doubt. But still they demand higher prices, stiffer terms, extra days, preferred dates, local checkers and all the other unfair advantages their monopoly has accustomed them to. Why? Well, largely because there are still exhibitors who will go for their cockeyed deals. Recent letters lrom Iowa and Nebraska exhibitors complain bitterly of neighboring exhibitors still going for 40% and 50% deals. And who can blame them for complaining; such deals work a hardship on all exhibitors. Sure, you are promised an "adjustment," promised the print ahead of your neighboring exhibitor, and you go for the deal, play the picture — and — where are you? Did everyone come from the neighboring towns? They did not! Did you make a net profit equal to the film rental, or even one-half the film rental? Not if you are the average small-town exhibitor and you honestly figure your overhead. And then did you get the adjustment? Sure, you did; you got all of $2.50 or $5.00, maybe even $10.00, but only when you had bought more pictures at the same screwy deal, thereby continuing the vicious circle. When will you get wise? When will you quit being a sucker? When will you realize that it is the net profit you have left, and nothing else, that really counts ? . . . "Resist all percentage deals, but if you must go for one now and then, never go for less than a 4, 4'/2 or 5 times split. No picture is worth more than you pay MGM; did you ever think of that? To quote Jack Kirsch, 'Take your time, know your pictures, then take it easy!" . . . ". . . From Allied Caravan and other sources we learn that Warner's 'Night and Day' and 'Stolen Life' are definitely big-city, first-run pictures . . . Paramount's 'Monsieur Beaucaire' is losing the battle to justify the terms it was sold at . . . 20th Century-Fox oversold 'Anna and the King of Siam,' 'Centennial Summer,' and 'Three Little Girls in Blue' . . . United Artists' 'Caesar and Cleopatra' is a prime boxoffice bust that smaller towns would do well to stay away from . . . RKO is getting 50% for 'Notorious' in some theatres in the Minneapolis territory! But on the brighter side . . . 20th Century-Fox has sold all current releases since "Smoky" at flat rentals in this territory . . . Paramount has sold all their pictures including 'Monsieur Beaucaire' at flat rentals; the same being true of RKO, United Artists and Universal, and recently of Warners, notably 'Cloak and Dagger' . . . MGM has prohibited moveovers and dual runs of their pictures. Fine . . . We are advised by the local branch that Republic is delivering the Roy Rogers on last year's contracts as they are completed and released. But it appears to me Republic has held up 'I've Always Loved You' and perhaps others, 'Plainsman and the Lady,' 'That Brennan Girl' and a colored Western or two, which they sold last year, beyond the contract expiration date (Clause Fifteenth, Republic Pictures contract) and we hear they are now out re-selling 'I've Always Loved You,' demanding 40%, or twice the former top flat rental. I wouldn't know what most of our small towns would want with this strictly 'class' musical with little star value, but if they do, they should not re-buy it at such terms, but should collectively and individually demand it, and the others, be delivered as sold on last year's contracts . . . "Watch out for Universal's new deal . . . Paramount's new deal, a 3 times split instead of 40%; it's some better, but never give better than a 4 to 5 times split . . . Guard carefully against initial high deals with new producing units; they set precedents you'll be years getting away from. Examples, Liberty Pictures through RKO, Universal's 'Dark Mirror," Borzages 'I've Always Loved You' through Republic .... "Are we following a pattern which led to a depression after World I? Certainly, we hope not, and we definitely are not trying to hang crepe; but let's look at the facts and see what we can learn from them. War's end was immediately followed by a labor tie-up of production, with increased wages, prices, shortages. Talk of more war — a gradual slowing down of business — resistance to OPA on the one side, resistance to higher prices on the other. Stock market break — cotton market break — butter and meat prices shoot upward, then downward. Elections give opposition party control of Congress with possible tie-up of necessary legislation, politics and economy being so tightly interwoven; could be another two years of 'do-nothing' in Washington like 1930-32. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? But I feel we should have learned from the 1929-33 debacle, and if the public will use good sense and not plunge and buy everything at exorbitant prices; if exhibitors will watch their boxoffiicc receipts and their film rentals carefully, keep them in line, and create a reserve to sec them thru' any tough days which may come, we will come through thrn transition period OK and not again have to face the tough days like 32-33; remember how fast box-office receipts fell off — when we couldn't get half a house even for a dime to everyone? Watch it carefully — create that surplus and you'll be OK." MR. RYAN'S ANALYSIS OF DECISION ACCLAIMED BY INDUSTRYITES Many letters have reached this paper congratulating it on its presentation of the series of articles entitled, "A Legal Analysis of the Statutory Court's Decision," written by Mr. George S. Ryan, the eminent attorney of Boston. Typical of these letters is the following one from Mr. Milton C. Weisman, prominent film attorney, of New York City: Law Offices of Weisman, Celler, Quinn, Allan 6? Spett 1450 Broadway New York 18, N. Y. November 25, 1946 Harrison's Reports 1270 Avenue of the Americans New York 20, N. Y. Attention: P. S. Harrison, Esq. My Dear Pete: I have been reading with the greatest of interest the articles appearing in your Reports written by George S. Ryan under the title "A Legal Analysis of the Statutory Court's Decision." Frankly I want to congratulate you on the clarity of this analysis, on its interesting and informative presentation and on the background that it gives to the entire decision, thus highlighting the decision itself. The thought struck me that this article is so worthy that it ought to be made up into a small monograph by itself. Congratulations again. Sincerely yours, (signed) Milton C. Weisman In presenting Mr. Ryan's articles, Harrison's Reports felt that it was rendering the industry an invaluable service, and it is indeed gratified by the many fine comments that have been received. Mr. Ryan's clear-cut legal analysis of this all-important decision, in which is reflected his profound knowledge of the anti-trust laws in relation to the motion picture industry, should prove of inestimable value to every reader of this paper. Congratulatory letters, therefore, should be directed, not to this paper, but to Mr. Ryan (6 Beacon St., Boston, Mass.) in appreciation of his gracious consent to write the articles in spite of the fact that their preparation required a great amount of work and took up much of his valuable time.