Harrison's Reports (1949)

188 HARRISON'S REPORTS November 19, 1949 no comment on their purported sales policy as we have been waiting for more concrete information. We must admit that to date we have not talked with anyone who has had these offers made to them by a Columbia representative. However, certain comments are in order. "First, let us consider their demand for 60% of the gross as film rental. Columbia owns this piece of merchandise and are within their right to ask any thing they wish for it, even 100%. But, to this office, their 60% demand is ridiculous. However, let's sum it up by saying: " 'If Columbia is stupid enough to ask 60%, that is no reason why any exhibitor should be damn fool enough to give them 60%.' "We have preached for years that no picture is worth even 50% and we cannot see any justification for an exhibitor, regardless of his condition or run, paying Columbia any such ridiculous terms. "Now as to raised admissions. It is hard for us to believe that Columbia would go into the field and let their salesmen approach ahy exhibitor and demand raised admissions. Why? Simply because this is definitely against the law and they know it. "If any salesman, branch manager, district mana' ger or anyone from Columbia approaches you and refuses to sell you 'Jolson Sings Again' unless you agree to raise your admissions, please write your local association and give them all the details . . . naming the time, place, who was present and give them exactly what was said when the demand was made. "We are not going to get the rights given us under the Government suit unless we police it ourselves. Information such as this is vital as we can submit it to the Department of Justice. I am sure Abe Montague will issue instructions to his offices to cease demanding increased admissions. However, if he does not, please cooperate and send in the dope. "When any salesman asks you for unreasonable prices and makes unreasonable demands, JUST SAY, 'NOP " The exhibitors throughout the country should be highly gratified that Allied, TOA and the PCCITO are of one mind in their condemnation of the terms and conditions demanded by Columbia on "Jolson Sings Again." With these three powerful organizations solidly against advanced admissions as a matter of general policy, and with all three prepared to fight to the limit against any attempt to circumvent or violate the law, Columbia will soon learn that the opposition is too formidable and that a change in policy and in attitude will save it much grief. Every exhibitor should do his part in this fight, for, as Nathan Yamins said at the Allied convention in Minneapolis, the exhibitors will find themselves with a paper victory unless they remain alert to violations of the Court's rulings. If pressure has been put on any of you, in any manner whatsoever, to make you agree to raise admission prices on the "Jolson" pic' ture, you should give this information to your organization leaders at once. CRITICISM NOT BASED ON FACTS Commenting on the resolution that was passed by National Allied in Minneapolis against any dictation whatsoever by any film company in the matter of fixing admission prices, and requesting that the direc tors and officers of the organization collect evidence for submission to the U. S. Attorney General, Red Kann said the following in his column in the October 27 issue of Motion Picture Daily, after quoting ex' cerpts from the U. S. Supreme Court's decision in the New York anti-trust case, and after quoting only the final paragraph of the Allied resolution: "What the U. S. District Court and the U. S. Supreme Court thereafter had to say about the fixing of admission prices, whether minimum or maximum or in between, was clear enough. "For Allied to take official notice of what it describes as a 'movement' by unnamed distributors towards an obvious violation of the law is a serious piece of business. One hopes there is less sensationalism in the plainly inferred accusation and far more of fact to back it up although the construction of the resolution suggests substance and substantiation are lacking. "It takes the most fertile kind of imagination to entertain the idea that there is a serious endeavor on the part of distributors, as a group, to bypass a court mandate so definitively expressed. And considerable proof, of course. . . ." From Red Kann's comments, one is left with the impression that Allied, in a wildly imaginative moment, passed a resolution in which it accused an unnamed group of distributors of attempting to violate the Court's ruling on the fixing of admission prices. If Mr. Kann had bothered to read the complete resolution, as published in the October 29 issue of this paper, and not only the final paragraph, he would have learned that the prefatory part of the resolution referred solely to the Columbia policy on "Jolson Sings Again," and that by no stretch of the imagination could the final paragraph be construed as meaning that a "group" of distributors were involved in the matter. Unfortunately, Red Kann was not on the convention floor when Columbia's efforts to compel the exhibitors to increase their admission prices if they wanted the "Jolson" picture was discussed. Had he been there, he would have seen John Wolfberg, president of the Rocky Mountain unit, leap from his seat and heard him brand as a "lie" Abe Montague's telegram denying the accusation. Mr. Wolfberg explained to the exhibitors present that he had been in Montague's office and that Montague had stated to him, in clear language, that he would demand from the exhibitors an increase of their admission prices for "Jolson Sings Again," and that he made such a demand on him. But Martin Quigley, Jr. was present, and had Mr. Kann taken the trouble to ask him he would have been told the facts. Mr. Kann demands proof and substantiation of the accusation that Columbia will attempt to impose upon the exhibitors, in face of a clear expression on the subject from the Courts, its price increase policy before he will believe it. Substantiation? Yes — he will get it; when a large number of exhibitors submit sworn affidavits accusing the Columbia sales forces of intimating to them that they must agree to an increase of their admission prices before their application for the aforementioned picture will be accepted. It is not likely that Mr. Kann will assume that these exhibitors will swear to false affidavits. As to proof, I hope that Mr. Kann is not so naive as to believe that any Columbia representative will put into writing his demand that an exhibitor promise to increase his admission prices; these Columbia fellows are not so dumb.