Showmen's Trade Review (Oct-Dec 1949)

16 Jackson . . . (Continued from Page IS) better than 35 per cent of those registering were from the towns covered by the counterpieces. The expense? Oh, I forgot to mention that Sedlack had some schooHng as a draftsman and is an excellent letterer. The expense was consequently confined to the cost of the show card board used in creating the displays. I don't know just where I got this one, but it's another to put in your book for use when good cooperation at little or no cost is needed. It does require a bit of smartness in presentation but, aside from that, the cost can be regulated right down to zero. There are few, if any, communities that don't boast a merchant who is, or can be induced to, engage in the printing and distribution of circulars on a regular periodic basis. They can always be sold on the value of star or scene art from movies as eye-catchers to command attention to their copy. Here's how a smart theatre manager goes about the job of getting the kind of cooperation from these merchants that will increase the take at the box-office without decreasing the size of the petty cash or advertising fund. Managing a discussion of the proposed cooperation with the merchant, the manager takes pencil in hand and begins to outline the expense the theatre will incur in fulfilling its end of the co-op deal. The idea that hits best is invariably the numbering of the handbills with a specified percentage of the total printed being acceptable as tickets at the theatre. In this event the manager carefully figures just how many tickets it will take to cover 2 or 3 per cent of the printed total. It is never advisable to exceed the 3 per cent figure because it only serves to lower the value of the theatre admission. As an example ; If the number to be printed and distributed is 2,500, he figures 50 or 75 tickets at the net price to the theatre and is careful to inform the merchant that Federal taxes are required of the ticket holder by law. If his net price is 29 cents, the managers uses paper to figure, before the merchant's very eyes, his cost at 14.50 or 21.75. To this he adds the cost of the mat he provides for illustration, cost of mailing, cost of a blackboard and the work of placing the stated number of winning circular holders thereon, etc. He then shows the merchant the exact cost to the theatre and exacts the full price of printing and distribution as the merchant's share. Get it straight. This is no cheat ! It is simply a business-like presentation to guide the sharing of expense on a cooperative endeavor. The only merchandise a theatre manager has to sell are seats and entertainment. If he provides a specified number of seats to accommodate the patrons of a grocer or other merchant, why shouldn't he assess them at full value? The merchant expects nothing but a fair deal, and the theatre manager who gives more than a fair deal is defeating every purpose of his job. Every unit listed above represents an outlay in cash or time or actual revenue to the theatre, and there is no good reason for not letting those who join you in advertising effort know exactly what, in ef¥ort and money, you are contributing. Most unsatisfactory merchant tieups are the result of managers approaching contacts with proposals like : "I'll GIVE 100 passes if you'll let me, etc., etc." Immediately the value of the theatre ticket is depreciated. If a studied and careful presentation, based on percentage of coverage and showing complete theatre costs. is made, any wideawake merchant will grab at an opportunity to tie-in with the place serving more customers than any other place in town — that's the theatre, my friend, in case you never figured it out before. Most managers take the assets of their theatres for granted and assume them to have no value whatever to cooperators. In instances of conducting merchant giveaways they always leave themselves under obligation to the merchant because they never take paper and pencil to list stage facilities, PiA system, master of ceremony duties, stage lighting, cost and value of lobby display, use of theatre equipment and service of theatre staffs in collecting and supervising collection of stubs, and so on ad infinitum. The careless manager assumes that the merchant knows all about these things when, in reality, they possess but a vague knowledge of the work and expense connected with theatre operation. And, to make the point obviously The Story of Seabiscuit {Continued from Page 14) appealing. The match race between Seabiscuit and War Admiral at Pimlico should appeal to horse lovers and racing fans. Barry Fitzgerald, stealing most of the scenes, gets the best out of his part. He delivers expertly the brand of comedy that has kept him in the top rank of character actors. Shirley Temple is young and breathtakingly lovely in Technicolor, and McAllister is clean-cut and likable as the famous jockey. Rosemary DeCamp, Donald MacBride and Pierre Watkin give good support. The fame of Seabiscuit, so well publicized a few years ago, gives this picture a natural draw and this, plus the marquee names, promises good business for the film in most locations. Alias the Champ Republic Comedy 60 mins. AUDIENCE SLANT: (Family) Gorgeous George, the colorful wrestler who puts on a show everytime he goes into the ring, makes his screen debut in this screamingly funny picture. Even those who do not ordinarily find wrestling enjoyable are bound to get many belly-laughs from this one. BOX-OFFICE SLANT: Gorgeous George's reputation as a wrestler, plus the fact that this is a good comedy, should help make it pay off in most situations. Don't let the customers be fooled by the title. Cast: Robert Rockwell. Barbra Fuller, Audrey Long, Jim Nolan, John Harmon, Sammy Menacker, Joseph Crehan, John Hamilton, Stephen Chase, Frank Scannell, Frank Yaconelli, Emmett Vogan, John Wald, Gorgeous George. Credits: Directed by George Blair. Written by Albert DeMond. Photography, John MacBurnie. Associate Producer, Stephen Auer. Plot: Trouble starts when a fight syndicate tries to get Gorgeous George and other wrestlers to join them. George's manager gets police protection, but there is considerable trouble before all ends happily. Comment: According to reports, wrestling l^outs have quite a following, and if this is true, the returns on this picture should be way above average for the general run of product. For Republic has taken Gorgeous George, a colorful wrestling showman, and put him into a film that suits his talents. Strangely enough, it is a screamingly funny SHOWMEN'S TRADE REVIEW, October 29, 1949 clear, if the merchant were to engage in the effort without the cooperation of the theatre, he would be obliged to lay out hard cash for each and every one of the units of cooperation provided at no cost through the tieup. Make 'em understand how expensive your theatre equipment is and list every detail ON PAPER when you go about working a co-op deal. Quit talking about your equipment as though it were so much street rubbish and available to anybody for the mere asking. If you were selling farm machinery you'd not be content with telling 'em about the paint job on a tractor. You'd go into details about its expensive innards. Well, the same thing goes when you go after cooperation for your theatre and eliminate every one of those inexcusable expenses for cooperative advertising. I really wanted to include much more along this line of thought, but time's up. Hope you'll be able to use some of these ideas. comedy; that is, the part that deals with the wrestling matches. Rest of the picture concerns the romance between a police lieutenant and the wrestler's female manager, and this part is just routine melodrama. But when it oomes to the wrestling scenes, where Gorgeous George goes into action, the customers will get many belly-laughs and enough entertainment to spread word-of-mouth and make the picture pay off in all situations. George Blair's direction plays up these scenes and this is to the advantage of the film, while Stephen Auer's production elements gives it plenty of exploitation possibilities. He has lined up many known wrestlers, a good selling point. Balance of the cast, though all ^ood, aren't too important, since the picture's main attraction is Gorgeous George. Prison Warden Columbia Drama 62 mins. AUDIENCE SLANT: (Adult) Too leisurely-paced for the average patron who wants more action in a prison yarn. BOX-OFFICE SLANT: Just another supporting film. Cast: Wanier Baxter, Anna Lee, James Flavin. Harlan Warde, Charles Cane, Reginald Sheffield, Harry Antrim, William "Bill" Phillips, Frank Richards, Jack Overman, Charles Evans, Harry Hayden, John R. Hamilton, Clancy Cooper, Edgar Dearing. Credits: Directed by Seymour Friedman. Screenplay by Eric Taylor. Photography, Henry Freulich. Produced by Rudolph C. Flothow. Plot: After planning her marriage to a prison warden so that she can be near the man she loves whom she believes innocent of the crime for which he has been convicted, a woman falls in love with her own husband and learns that the man she thought innocent has really committed the crime for which he was imprisoned. Eventually, the convict escapes and is killed through his own recklessness. Comment: This Warner Baxter prison yarn emerges as a minor supporting film. Leisurely-paced it lacks the excitement and action to make it popular with the average patron. Baxter, Anna Lee and Harlan Warde make up the triangle around whom the story revolves, with Baxter turning in a smooth portrayal as the warden. Anna Lee is charming and convincing in the role of the woman in love with two men and Warde does well as the convict. BOX-OFFICE SLANTS