Boxoffice-11.11.1950

BOXOFFICE :: November 11, 1950
i
DIVIDED TOA TO MEET COMPO
ON REPRESENTATION DEMANDS
Confusion Exists With No
One Willing to Predict
Outcome of Meetings
By SUMNER SMITH
NEW YORK—The future of the Council
of Motion Picture Organizations, at the
very least participation
in it by the
Theatre Owners of
America, was in the
lap of the gods as
the week ended. No
one connected with
the industry minimized
the seriousness
of the situation
arising from the TOA
resolution at its
Houston convention
Ted Gamble calling for additional
representation
in COMPO. Pi-ivate views were expressed
by some exhibitors, but none would attempt
to predict what may happen.
NO PREDICTION ON OUTCOME
The absolute lack of any predictions was
mainly due to the well-known fact that the
TOA committee, headed by Ted R. Gamble,
which will meet with COMPO officials, is
split right down the middle. If it presented a
united front, what actions might be taken at
meetings of the COMPO board Thursday (16)
and Friday (17) might be foreseen to some
extent.
In the meantime, COMPO was not pushing
its organization of regional committees in the
31 exchange areas, a setup that TOA has
protested. It was said that each area had
made its individual nominations of repre-
.sentatives, and that completion of formation
of full-sized committees is under way, but
there was no indication the job of setting up
the committees was being prosecuted vigorously.
No one would say that the plan might
be abandoned in favor of clearance through
the member exhibitor organizations, but that
loomed as a possible bargaining point.
TRYING FOR TOA ACCORD
TOA members were still trying to get together
on what demands for more representation
should be made to COMPO. That demands
of some nature would have to be made
was certain because of the resolution adopted
at the convention calling on the Gamble committee
to settle the following issues:
(1) To in.sure the autonomy of local and
regional exhibitor groups in the overall
public relations program.
(2) To limit COMPO activities to pubhc
relations and to the national level.
(3) To have COMPO reorganize itself
along the lines of fairer repre.sentation.
The third clause constituted the main difficulty.
One prominent member of the Indus-
Mayer Clarifies
Protest
On Construction Ban
NEW YORK—The objections raised by
Arthur L. Mayer, executive vice-president
of the Council of Motion Picture Organizations,
to the
building restrictions
order of the
National Production
Authority had
to do with restrictions
on theatre
repairs and renovations
to an annual
cost of $5,000
and which put film
theatres in the
same classification
as dance halls,
L. S. Hamm
gambling establishments
and poolrooms.
Mayer clarified his position in a wire
to L. S. Hamm, president of the California
Theatres Ass'n. Hamm had wired
that his unit did not agree with the
COMPO protest because the NPA ruling
should be "loyally supported by our industry,"
and because a hearing would
cause "unfavorable public reaction."
Mayer wired
Hamm:
"Apparently there is considerable misunderstanding
of our protest to the NPA
which we are eager to dissipate. Realizing
as you do that our business should
not appear to be in the position of opposing
the national defense effort, we centered
our protest against the specific part
of the NPA order that restricts structural
repairs and renovations to $5,000 annually.
try said : "The make-up of the COMPO board
is a parliamentary puzzle."
A circuit head told BOXOFFICE:
"Sectional representation is very much to
the fore in this dispute. Various TOA units
have made this very clear to the national
officers. Representation right now is unbalanced.
We hope that adjustments can be
made. For instance, TOA is not strong in
Ohio and Minnesota where National Allied
predominates. There is no reason why Allied
should not demand additional representation
in states like those."
Another said: "The 8,000 theatres which
are in the TOA fold entitle the national organization
to fuller representation on the
COMPO board."
'
When TOA objections to COMPO developed
several months ago, it was thought
they were being raised by Charles Skouras
because of the presence on the board of only
"It appeared to us that such a restriction
might inflict serious hardship
on many theatres without any compensatory
benefit in the saving of critical
materials for the purposes of national
defense. At the very least we felt that
we should get the same privilege now
being extended to television and radio
interests of arguing about regulations
before, rather than after, they had been
issued, and making a study of what the
savings of critical materials proposed by
the order would amount to.
"We are constantly being asked to
cooperate with government and quasipublic
agencies in the distribution and
exhibition of films connected with the
present emergency, and to make theatres
community centers for the dissemination
of information and the maintenance
of public morale. We welcome
these opportunities for public service,
but if we are to perform them adequately
we should not be classified with
dance halls, gambling establishments and
poolrooms, but are entitled to the same
respect and treatment that are being
extended to other media of communication.
"I would appreciate your conveying the
contents of this wire to your members
and advise me if they are not in accord
with this action, as we are only the
servants of the industry and, strongly
as I feel in this matter, I must of course
be guided by the industry's wishes."
Hamm replied to Mayer that his telegram
"satisfactorily clarifies your protest
filed with the NPA and we are in
accord as per the information set forth."
two representatives for the 22 states west of
the Mississippi. These were Rotus Harvey
and Wilham Graeper jr., both of the Pacific
Coast Conference of Independent Theatre
Owners. However, other objections became
apparent at the TOA convention.
It will be remembered that at the last
meeting of the COMPO board, invitations
went out to board members to bring with
them other associates to offer their views on
organizational matters. The meeting apparently
benefited from the views expressed by
these nonmembers, who had no voting
privilege. Some who recall that occasion
feel that additional representation at COMPO
meetings could be arranged for the sake of a
full and free discu.ssion of problems, with the
powers of the vote and veto limited as now
to the two board members representing each
member group. Though two in number, they
(Continued on page 10)