Evidence study no. 25 of the motion picture industry (1933)

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.

Introduction ^><^>^><^<^><^<^<^>^>x\ for whom it is quite as imperative that they reconstruct their own scale of values as it is for some of those outside. A case in point is the controversy which has developed concerning the wisdom or necessity of so-called "banker control" of the industry. The entrance of the banking interests into the industry was a foregone conclusion. It was perfectly apparent years ago that as the industry grew it would have to be assisted in its financing from the outside. The obvious source of such funds would be the usual financial groups. The expansions in 1925, 1926, and on through 1929 would have been impossible without such assistance. Overexpansion occurred. Whether it was the fault of the banker in extending credit to finance the rapid expansion, not justified by conditions, or whether it was the fault of the industry in seeking support for expansion programs that they should have known were primarily competitive in their conception and not so conservative as they should have been — the blunt fact remains that outside financing was available. The industry, itself, was unable to meet its obligations, and like all other financially embarrassed organizations it passed under the guidance of its creditors. It is apparent also, of course, that profits which had been made in the industry were attractive to those interested in substantial returns from whatever source. The whole problem came to a focal point with the depression, but it is obviously unwise to say that it was caused by the depression — the motivating forces lay deeper. It is clear that, when this situation did come to a head and economies were called for, those whose interests were being protected, namely the creditors, would demand what seemed to be reasonable improvements. No one familiar with the facts would deny for a moment that enormous and quite unjustifiable wastes existed in the industry. These would have to be eliminated or reduced. If it is said that the bankers were intruding into an industry with which they had had no experience, the obvious reply is that the industry had shown itself quite unable to overcome the difficulties