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.

Background of the Industry <^ ^ ^> ^> 21 or desirable to discuss them at this point. It would be wise, however, by means of a brief sketch, to bring the story of this development up to date. The existence of an increasing number of independent chains, which were becoming significant because of their strong competitive position in the cities in which they operated, has already been indicated. Their strength was felt in two directions. The small independent exhibitor was finding it increasingly difficult to hold his own against the competition of the growing chain. For one thing, the ability of the small exhibitor to draw patronage was jeopardized by the fact that he could not pay sufficiently high rentals to secure the type of picture believed necessary. In other cases the chains dominated first-run exhibition, so that pictures could not be obtained by the independent at any price until after the customary protection period had expired.12 Largely to correct these difficulties, many small exhibitors formed what were called in the trade "booking combines".13 These booking combines, while usually not permanent, did exercise a considerable influence. Their possibilities for success were very limited because of the antagonism of distributors, internal friction, and the competitive bidding of chains for pictures. The existence of booking combinations, and to a greater extent the existence of well-intrenched independent chains, became competitive factors encountered by the producerdistributor in reaching out for his own retail market. The more aggressive producer-distributors became fully cognizant of the situation and again adopted the policy of theater acquisition. Other influences were, of course, at work. Those fundamental factors to which reference has already been made as contributing toward integration continued to play their part. In fact, it was largely the effect of the independent chains upon these primary factors which stimulated the 12 See Chapter VII. 13 See Chapter X.