Boxoffice-March.1988

THE FATE OF INDEPENDENT THEATRES
Warner
(continued from p SW-10)
markets are saying is that they want the
hits as soon as possible. I can understand
that a distributor does not want to make
up a print for every small market town in
the country, but when they know they
have a hit I feel they could make up a few
extra prints and sell them on fixed playdates
to small markets. This is important
in order for them to have faster playoffs
on big pictures, in particular when they
know the larger markets are not going to
release the prints because of the staying
power of the picture. Some examples of
films that I feel would be in this category
this fall were "Fatal Attraction" and "Dirty
Dancing." In fact, "Dirty, Dancing"
will not have played in several of the
smaller markets before being released on
video.
Film, however, is not the only problem
of small market theatres and/or small
independent exhibition One of the major
problems faced by independent exhibition
is financing and cash flow in order to
keep competitive in the marketplace. I
am convinced after years of studying the
problem that the only solution is to get
the SBA to do away with the exclusion of
theatres that is discriminatory and no
longer valid. This would enable the small
theatre owner to get the necessary financing
to stay competitive in the marketplace.
The new group of independent theatre
owners that is threatened in the marketplace
is the large and small independent
regional circuits. For this reason, I feel
that as an industry we should develop a
plan that allows the independent owner
a flow of product in the marketplace
regardless of the national strength of a
competitor, as long as the independent
has viable theatres and a quality operation.
Currently, there are several film
companies that operate in this fashion
and bring equity to the marketplace, but I
feel that if the independent is to survive
this must become an industry standard
for all film companies. It's an untenable
situation when they have just one customer
in a marketplace and don't give
independents any of their product. If this
situation continues to exist it will be to
the detriment of both distribution and
exhibition because it will be settled outside
of the marketplace and in the courts.
It is important that the independent
theatre owner realize that this struggle is
simply for their fair share of the marketplace;
nothing more, nothing less.
I am sure that there are many other
problems facing independent exhibition
today and that I have dealt with just a
few. I am also confident that a version of
these same problems have been dealt
with in the past and that a variation on
them will be dealt with by future generations
of independent exhibitors. I am confident
that independent exhibition will
survive in some form. Ultimately, we as
an industry must realize that independent
exhibition is healthy for the industry and
that their cause is just.
I would be remiss in writing on the
struggle to save independents and not
acknowledge the efforts on their behalf
put forth by Ross Campbell, Jerome Gordon,
Tony DeSantas, Roy Roper and others
mentioned here. Good luck and good
fortune. I hope you enjoy ShoWest '88. H
The
Boston
Companv
co««5*i«,
?1
and our ne>N P.O. BOX 309
so^^on
ShoWesl'B* BOBth'65
Response No. 79
SW-14
BOXOFFICE