Motion Picture Herald (Oct-Dec 1956)

The HERALD INSTITUTE A f Industry. Opinion EXHIBITORS SEEK WAYS OF STIMULATING THE BOX OFFICE RESPONSE by JAMES D. IVERS Any sound plan for building attendance on a general basis for motion picture theatres if proved sound will receive enthusiastic support from motion picture exhibitors. Exhibitor panel members of the Herald Institute of Industry Opinion are strongly of the belief that any credit card system of admissions would be impractical. They are critical of local newspapers because they feel less space is being given to motion pictures than there used to be and far less than television gets. Almost three quarters of them participated in last year’s Audience Awards plan and more than that expect to this year. Only slightly less than half of them favor a survey by a research organization to find out why attendance is off. Those are the conclusions of Part III of the Institute’s study of factors affecting attendance and what is to be done in that direction. Part I, covering suggestions on the types of product needed, appeared in The HERALD for September 8, and Part II, covering theatre operating practices, was published last week. The vote against credit card systems, now considered by a committee of the Motion Picture Association of America, was heaviest in the smaller towns but •even in large cities it averaged more than 70 per cent. On the other hand, of those who favored it, some felt strongly. George Diamos of Tucson, Arizona, considered it the most important of the questions considered in the study. “American business is conducted on credit,” he said, “and your most successful businesses are strictly on a credit basis at the retail level. I believe that a large majority of our attendance illness could be cured by issuing credit cards to the public.” Tommy James of St. Louis suggested the sale of coupon books at $5 or $10 with each coupon good for one admission at a ratio slightly lower than box office. A great many panel members were convinced that newspaper space devoted to motion picture publicity has declined in the last 10 years and that the decline is especially notable in the face of the amount of space allotted to television programs and publicity. Over 48 per cent of them felt that newspaper space was not satisfactory and another 36 or 37 per cent felt that while the situation was not too bad it could stand some improvement. In this connection a Missouri exhibitor suggested that more and better publicity might be obtained if theatres, in cooperation with distributors, ran more benefits — he suggested about six a year — for local Red Cross drives, Boy Scouts or others. On this phase also several panel members enlarged on the need for more and better advertising. “Present advertising is trite and misleading,” an Oklahoma City exhibitor charged. An important Georgia owner said there is great need for an impartial appraisal of our advertising in newspapers and magazines. A Massachusetts exhibitor said, “The really successful pictures since TV and the era of the family staying at home, were the pictures that have been widely advertised in all media. Any picture that is good enough to be made is good enough to be advertised in a way that is especially suited for that picture. One style ad in one magazine does not make a campaign nor does one small ad in one day’s paper make business get anything but worse. Advertising built this business and careful, freshly styled group advertising will reach and attract more patrons.” An average of 71.1 per cent of the panelists said they participated in last year’s Audience Awards plan sponsored by the Council of Motion Picture Organizations. Here, however, the smaller situations differed sharply, most of them contending that the cost did not warrant participation in small situations. A parallel ratio held true for the question of whether or not they would participate this year. An average of 79.4 per cent said they would, again mostly from the larger situations. On this point George Riester of Shamokin, Pa., asked, “Why not have some sort of giveaway contest on a national scale, making it compulsory to get applications at local theatres. It appears good enough for the auto industry, why not ours?” Also Pearce Parkhurst, operating a drive-in at Lansing, Mich., urged the timing of the Audience Awards be moved to early September or late Spring so that more drive-ins could participate. PANELISTS' VIEWS ON BUSINESS-BUILDING Question: What is your attitude toward a credit card system for theatre admissions? Up to 7,5 00 30,000 Over Total 7,500 30,000 100,000 100,000 Exhibition Interested 18.4 — 27.7 28.6 18.7 Believe it impractical 81.6 100 72.3 71.4 81.3 Question: Is the volume of space in your local newspapers devoted to motion pic tures satisfactory by comparison with 10 years ago and compared to free space given television? Yes 16.7 10 19 13.3 14.8 No 47.9 45 47.6 * 53.3 48.5 Needs improvement ... 35.4 45 33.4 33.4 36.8 Question: Did you participate in the 1955 Audience Awards plan? Yes 47.9 66.7 85 84.6 71.1 No 52.1 33.3 15 15.4 28.9 Question: Do you expect to participate in this year's Audience Awards? Yes 58.1 78.9 94.4 86.3 79.4 No 41.9 21.1 5.6 13.6 20.6 Question: Do you favor a survey by a research they do not attend movies more frequently? organization to ask the public why Yes 41.4 40 40.6 48.5 42.6 No, such questions would accent the decline in attend ance 1 3.8 24 9.4 14.3 15.4 Would favor asking why people like to go to the movies 37.9 36 46.9 37.2 39.5 No opinion 6.9 — 3.1 — 2.5 12 MOTION PICTURE HERALD, OCTOBER 20. 1956